[Businessmtg] Agenda Item 3: Website - Jerry Note re: Kristen Thread
Jerry H.
logmark at comcast.net
Fri Mar 30 16:18:11 PDT 2018
Kristen, Biz-Pals,
It is apparent that there is a misunderstanding of a few important points. These points have been made but perhaps not clearly enough. [Kristen has suggested that I respond in the Business Meeting otherwise I would not normally do so.]
We have determined that the 2014 web content most closely resembles the existing group conscience. HOWEVER, that 2014 content, in many important aspects, had never been updated to comply with Motion #4, so even though Steve has done his best to get the website to 2014 text (which was his only authorized task), it still has to have corrections made to it to comply with the existing Group Conscience Motion #4 of 2006. Steve is not authorized to make these corrections. So we have two layers of corrections: one Steve has done/is doing following instructions; the other remains to be done.
What I see happening is that assumptions are being made and published based on some of the incorrect language still on the web site (and therefore through the link access at the bottom of shares.)
See where it says Policies and practices in Motion #4? What we seem to be wrangling about mostly are these practices. Those of us who have been around quite a while recognize where our practices have been altered. Newer folks only know the altered practices. Now, when those of us who remember such things speak out we are accused of being controlling or making things up. That's just not so. The making things up stuff are the things which need correction. It is my intention to bring these things to light in the next Business Meeting. It's going to take me much or April to go over everything line-by-line and point out those places where the current web content doesn't match the Group Conscience approved in Motion #4.
I reiterate: the group is obligated to follow the group conscience as it exists. That doesn't preclude change. It does, though, get us to a starting point where our walk matches our talk and we can move on from there.
In service,
Jerry
-
> On March 30, 2018 at 3:35 PM Kristen Z <asplove007 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This “language/content” on our webpages via the links at the bottom of every email received and sent in ASP. Jerry, please click on them and find for yourself what our replaced website pages state.
>
> If they are still incorrect aka the Sandie era you refer to...
> please point that out to the entire BM rather than addressing website problems/concerns with just me or the steering committee. If you are unwilling or unable to send this information to the BM I will be mentioning it so that it can be rectified soon. A member of ANY Al-Anon Meeting ought not have to suffer assumptions or accusations of ill-will by their fellow Al-Anoner because the “data/content/archives” of the meeting’s guidelines lack accuracy, consistency, or perspicacity.
>
> ...intentional? I’m not even responding to these sorts of accusations.
> I’m NEW and TRYING to provide a method (based on the content available) so things don’t go off course in the BM.
>
> Still a newcomer,
> Kristen
>
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 6:35 AM Jerry <logmark at comcast.net mailto:logmark at comcast.net > wrote:
>
> > >
> > Kristen,
> >
> > You're following "Sandie language" that got us into this fix in the first place. We're supposed to be in the middle of a process which rids us of these changes, not reinforces them. Then, even while using this mistaken language you altered it even further by excluding the List Administrator - how much sense does that make since the LA chairs the Steering Committee? Now, was that just another error, or was that intentional?
> >
> > Our goal ought to be returning to the Policies and Practices ASP used prior to the mess Sandie made. Instead you published TO THE BUSINESS MEETING false information, some of it snagged from the altered web and some completely made up by you. Where in the world did you come up with bringing suggested topics up in the BM? Worthy of a SC discussion, yes as I alluded to in my note, but you've stated it as fact to the BM! And this minority report thing you arbitrarily brought in is completely misapplied. Minority Reports only follow motions which have been voted on. By having done these things you have made our challenge more difficult, not easier.
> >
> > Jerry
> > -
> >
> >
> >
> > On March 28, 2018, at 11:47 PM, Kristen Z <asplove007 at gmail.com mailto:asplove007 at gmail.com > wrote:
> >
> >
> > The thin air I grabbed procedure from Where it states how to suggest a topic for the business meeting...
> >
> > http://asp-afg.org/members/member-instructions/
> >
> > Regards,
> > Kristen
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 9:22 PM Jerry <logmark at comcast.net mailto:logmark at comcast.net > wrote:
> >
> > > > > Kristen, all,
> > >
> > > Where on earth did you come up with this process for creating the Business Meeting agenda? What you describe has never been ASP's authorized practice.
> > >
> > > First off, yes, any member can suggest topics for Business Meeting agendas. However these suggestions can be made to ANY member of the Steering Committee. During the last few years the past LA and Secretary chose to alter ASP's practices without approval and our process was misstated. Your statement that members bring topic suggestions only to the Secretary is simply mistaken. There is no one-person funnel to the Steering Committee.
> > >
> > > The other options you mention are, seemingly, just made up out of thin air. Where did this new stuff come from?:
> > >
> > > ~ New topics are not brought up in the Business Meeting; the Business Meeting follows the agenda items set by the Steering Committee. It is the Secretary's job to keep the meeting on the agenda items.
> > > I do believe we could better use "dead air time" by reaching deeper into items the SC has received particularly when there is a 7-day voting period in place - and I like Anne's suggestion of the SC maintaining a published list of prioritized topics. I would have no problem with having a "Suggested New Business" item at the end of the BM agenda, but those suggestions would then go to the SC no differently than suggestions received from individual members.
> > >
> > > ~ Minority Reports are only appropriate where a motion has been voted on. The minority voice of that vote (the side which lost the vote) can choose to submit a Minority Report for filing. This report would be written by those who were on the 'losing' side. Minority Reports can be submitted on any passed or failed motion. This invented "ineffective/unproductive" language you use plays absolutely no part in a minority's choice to write and submit a report - that's guaranteed by ASP's business practices.
> > >
> > > Jerry
> > > -
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On March 28, 2018, at 4:17 PM, Secretary <secretary at asp-afg.org mailto:secretary at asp-afg.org > wrote:
> > >
> > > Good Day Everyone,
> > >
> > > Thank you for your continued participation in the March ASP Business
> > > Meeting.
> > >
> > > Please refrain from discussing matters that are not in relation to the
> > > current Agenda Item.
> > > In maintaining both policy and procedure our business meetings are able
> > > to function with a level of consistency and direction.
> > >
> > > I understand that in Al-Anon the Business Meeting is the place to bring
> > > attention to matters affecting the meeting/membership. No matter the
> > > brevity of an issue we are asked to honor the group conscience process.
> > >
> > > Here is my understanding of the process:
> > > Any Member may send a suggested Business Meeting Agenda Item they would
> > > like addressed at ASP to tthe BM Chairperson (Secretary) who then
> > > presents the Members suggestions to the Steering Committee (where final
> > > BM Agendas are created).
> > > If the aforementioned method proves ineffective/ unproductive then a
> > > member may bring their suggested BM Agenda Item directly to the Business
> > > Meeting.
> > > If this method proves ineffective/unproductive the member may announce
> > > their intent to Report, followed by the member creating a Minority
> > > Report that is deliverable to the leadership/trusted servants of A
> > > Serenity Place via the email address steering_committee at asp-afg.org mailto:steering_committee at asp-afg.org
> > >
> > > Thank You again for your participation and service to ASP.
> > > --
> > > Yours in service,
> > > Kristen
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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 Jerry the List Administrator, at la at asp-afg.org mailto:la at asp-afg.org
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Businessmtg mailing list
> > > Businessmtg at asp-afg.org mailto:Businessmtg at asp-afg.org
> > > http://www.asp-afg.org/mailman/listinfo/businessmtg
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
More information about the Businessmtg
mailing list