[Businessmtg] Threading

Thu Mar 30 13:08:01 PDT 2017

Steve, 

Yes they are rejected.. first they receive a auto email and then I send them a individual email especially if they are new and I strongly encourage them to resend. 
 The majority of those resend their share using the proper format..Most of the others are actually intending on a reply to the email that they are responding but instead do a reply all.  If the share went through it would be very much crosstalk.  

I am just following the exact same procedure that Cyndi used.. 

Sandie 

Please join us at Al-Anon's Sixth International Convention

http://www.al-anoninternationalconvention.org/sixthInternational.html

> On Mar 30, 2017, at 2:43 PM, Steve Rankin <steve at serenitysys.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi ASPers, and Sandie,
> 
> 
> 
> “All "reply all" sent to the recovery meeting are rejected.  It is only in
> the Business Meeting where they are "approved".”
> 
> 
> 
> I’m a bit disturbed by what I’m understanding here.
> 
> 
> 
> What I believe you are saying is that EVERY share sent to the ASP recovery
> meeting with multiple recipients (the result of using the “Reply to All”
> function) is rejected. Period. End of story.
> 
> 
> 
> Having been the List Owner for 10 years, I’m familiar with the process on
> your end.
> 
> 
> 
> 1. A member sends their share to ASP with multiple recipients. Maybe it was
> a “Reply to All” but it can just as easily be the member CC’ing their
> sponsor, or maybe a family member, or good friend in Al-Anon. NOTE: no
> anonymity issue because the member is sharing their own ESH.
> 
> 
> 
> 2. The server receives the share from the member, but for strictly technical
> reasons, the server setting instruct the server to hold the share instead of
> forwarding it to ASP.
> 
> 
> 
> 3. The server send you a note informing you that the server is holding a
> message for YOUR approval/rejection.
> 
> 
> 
> 4. You reject ALL shares with multiple recipients held by the server, rather
> than approving them.
> 
> 
> 
> As a result, when a member mistakenly sends a share to ASP with multiple
> recipients, ASP never receives that share.
> 
> 
> 
> Since we strive to be as much like a face-to-face meeting as possible,
> please let me compare this process to a f2f meeting. New members rarely
> understand how our meetings work. As a result, some sit in the meeting and
> remain mute until they understand “the rules”. Others, start sharing
> almost immediately. A few weeks ago, we had a brand new first timer at my
> home group. The newcomer started talking after just a couple of members had
> shared. Naturally, she wasn’t doing it “right”. There was cross talk
> regarding the shares she’d heard so far, plus this was technically a Step
> meeting and the group conscience is that we ONLY talk about the Step when we
> have a Step meeting - no OT that one night.
> 
> 
> 
> But, did we stop her from sharing?  Nope. Instead, after a few minutes, we
> suggested that she stick around after the meeting and talk to others.
> 
> 
> 
> So, my ESH on this issue boils down to what I did for those 10 years that I
> was in your shoes.
> 
> 
> 
> When I got the message from the server, I’d log into the server and see
> what was there:
> 
> 
> 
> A. Sometimes it was SPAM - SPAM was the original reason for this setting.
> Technology has changed and that’s not the problem today.
> 
> 
> 
> B. Most of the time, it was an honest mistake by a member. So, I’d approve
> of the share and off it would go to ASP.
> 
> 
> 
> C. On rare occasion, there is a serious behavior problem in the ASP meeting
> →→→  Rather than fill the body of this note with a lengthy description of
> this process, I’ve moved it to the bottom. Please see below for a
> description of what happens in cases of severe behavior problems.
> 
> 
> 
> What concerns me here is that I’m understanding that there has been a major
> shift in the policy and practice dealing with shares sent to multiple
> recipients.
> 
> 
> 
> While, I’m personally in favor of the server stopping shares sent to
> multiple recipients, I’m not in favor of a policy or practice in ASP that
> unilaterally throws all of those shares in the trash.
> 
> 
> 
> I believe this is another issue that needs to be discussed in the Business
> Meeting with an eye towards reaching a consensus and group conscience on how
> this policy and/or practice is implemented at ASP. In other words, Laura
> would you please put this on the Business Meeting agenda. Thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> Hugs,
> 
> Steve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> =========================================
> 
> The process we’ve used when faced with severe behavior problems.
> 
> =========================================
> 
> A member is misbehaving so badly that a significant portion of the ASP
> meeting is upset and the meeting is clearly disrupted by the behavior. It is
> very important to understand that a member or members getting upset with
> something another member shared is NOT evidence of a behavior problem. It’s
> a sad fact that most of us get to Al-Anon with “triggers” that set us off
> and we find very upsetting. Those “triggers” are our issues and something
> we need to work on in our recovery. When someone bumps into one of those
> triggers, that’s not their fault or a reflection on their behavior.
> 
> 
> 
> There are also instances when members infer something from what another
> member shared. This is a lot like triggers. Our members are only responsible
> for the words they actually typed and sent to ASP. What another member reads
> into or infers from that is their stuff.
> 
> 
> 
> Back to those very rare situations when we’ve had a behavior problem at
> ASP.
> 
> 
> 
> IF the Steering Committee feels that the member in question is an ongoing
> threat to ASP, then the server is set to “moderate” that member. When that
> happens, the server stops and holds ALL messages from that member. The List
> Administrator receives a note from the server, logs into the server, and
> checks the message to see what’s there before deciding to approve or reject
> the moderated member’s shares. If a message violates ASP, then the message
> is rejected. However, if the message is a normal share of ESH, then the
> message is approved.
> 
> 
> 
> Remember this only happens on rare occasion, AND in most instances the
> decision to moderate a member is a consensus of the entire Steering
> Committee. It is on even rarer occasions that the situation is so critical
> and time sensitive that the List Administrator exercises their autonomy to
> moderate the individual immediately, but then the discussion regarding the
> situation reverts back to the Steering Committee as a whole.
> 
> =============================================
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sandie’s message that I’m referring to:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Businessmtg [mailto:businessmtg-bounces+steve=serenitysys.com at asp-afg.
> org] On Behalf Of List Administrator
> Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 9:49 AM
> To: Steve - SC
> Cc: ASP Business
> Subject: Re: [Businessmtg] Threading
> 
> 
> 
> All "reply all" sent to the recovery meeting are rejected.  It is only in
> the Business Meeting where they are "approved".
> 
> 
> 
> What happened this morning - was not even through the server.  The member
> did a reply to the Chair and then deleted the lead somehow.
> 
> 
> 
> I really don't know how exactly it happened.  I have  not seen that before
> only buried leads when someone does a reply to the lead and then posts it to
> the group. The share is addressed to the group but attached to the lead or
> someone else's share.
> 
> 
> 
> Hugs
> 
> 
> 
> Sandie
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The ASP Instruction page is http://asp-afg.org/members/asp-instructions/
> 
> The ASP web site for ASP members is http://www.asp-afg.org/Members/
> 
> For assistance with other ASP issues, contact the List Administrator, at  list_administrator at asp-afg.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Businessmtg mailing list
> Businessmtg at asp-afg.org
> http://www.asp-afg.org/mailman/listinfo/businessmtg