[Businessmtg] Fw: Original Group Conscience

[Karen Clem]

sorry all....i thought i posted this to group...my bad....

     On Sunday, October 29, 2017 10:52 AM, Karen Clem <kacasp17 at yahoo.com> wrote:
 

 I agree with steve on this.   

hugggsss,
karen c
 

    On Saturday, October 28, 2017 8:08 PM, Steve Rankin <steve at serenitysys.com> wrote:
 

 Hi Adele,

You are missing a couple of critically important components in your
comparison.

My experience has been that the group conscience in Al-Anon process goes
smoothly IF:

A. The issue is something that the GRs think is worthwhile.

B. The issue is not controversial.

C. The trusted servants are open and thorough in their disclosure of
information.

D. The processes normally followed by the group, District, Area are followed
EXACTLY.

E. The process is not rushed at any point.

F. There is no sense of cover-up or personal agenda involved. 



If you have all 6 of those things in place, the process is likely to be
smooth and result in an informed group conscience with very high degree of
unanimity. Obviously, this was the case in your District. 

However, if there is something wrong with any of those, the result is
invariably very messy. 



I'll offer an example that occurred when I was an Area Officer in the late
90's. Our Area (Northern California) had just recently authorized
development of a website. The Past Delegate that was Chair of the Website
Committee came to the Area suggesting that the Area include a link to CAFG
on the website. As always, he presented a very good case for adding this
link to the website:
 a. WSO's website was new and  . . . lame would be a nice way to put it.
Useless also comes to mind.
 b. The CAFG site was far better developed with lots of information for
members.
 c. The CAFG site was in 7 languages.
You could feel the excitement in the room for this idea. 
Then, one member went to the microphone and explained that . . .
 a. The CAFG site was private and operated by one individual (a sponsee of
that Past Delegate)
 b. WSO had filed a law suit against that individual for using the WSO
domain name as well as for other copyright violations.
The Chair put the motion to a vote - it failed with well over 90% voting
against it. 


Unfortunately, our situation has problems with B, C, D, E, and F. The ONLY
point of agreement is that the website needs work. 


The big picture of the process is simple  . . . the existing group
conscience is THE group conscience until there is a new group conscience
that replaces or updates it. In our situation, there has been no group
conscience regarding the kinds of changes that have been made to the
website, therefore the old group conscience is still the only valid group
conscience. 

I haven't heard anyone trying to stay with the old group conscience because
they were wed to it. Remember that I supported Jane when she approached me
regarding making changes to the DESIGN of the website. I didn't like
WordPress then, and I don't like WordPress now. My reasons have to do with
real world issues like website & server security, a simpler website. Yet, I
didn't challenge Jane because she had promised both myself and the entire
Steering Committee that she would only change the 'design' of the website
and that she had worked hard to make sure that everything on the original
site was on the new site. 

Then about two years later, Jane mentioned something being on the website
that I'd never heard of, and I asked about that. It was then that we
followed that trail and discovered a complete maze of changes that I still
struggle to understand myself.  

What are dealing with is that MANY changes were made without authorization,
that those changes were substantive (not just fluff). Some of those changes
were merely substantive, but were major changes in the language which meant
major changes in policy. All done without the knowledge of anyone else. 

This issue has become one of personalities over principles. I find it
interesting that both Jane and Sandie have made the case that Jane
"deserves" this, etc. Since when does a healthy Al-Anon group pass a motion
because a member deserved it?  

No, a healthy group keeps its focus on the ball. What are the real issues?
Is the group conscience being followed? Is this situation being manipulated
to further an agenda? Is the group fully informed? Does the group understand
each and every facet of the issue?

We are not looking to be stagnant. In fact, I have a hunch that during the
coming months, we will be looking at making a variety of changes. It will be
interesting to see who is resistant to change then. How many will cling to
the idea that it wasn't broke, etc. OTOH, I'm hoping that with our leaders
following our group consciences regarding the process - HOW we go about
making new decisions - that the process will be smooth and relatively easy. 

Hugs,
Steve



-----Original Message-----
From: Businessmtg
[mailto:businessmtg-bounces+steve=serenitysys.com at asp-afg.org] On Behalf Of
Adele Steirnagle
Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2017 3:30 PM
To: Steve - SC
Cc: ASP Business
Subject: [Businessmtg] Original Group Conscience

Staying with a group conscience from the far past is not Al-Anon. This
amazing process continues to grow with the group consciences of the present
members. When I was a Group Representative for my district, we completely
changed our Website. Absolutely no problem. If we had had members from years
and years back trying no to change the old website we would have what ASP
has now. And we are only one meeting. My district has 70 times that many.
It works because it is not stagnant,
Adele 


_______________________________________________
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