[Businessmtg] Rewording the motion

[Steve Rankin]

Hi Beverly,
There may well be differences between the electronic versions of the newcomer packet and the paper version.  In fact, that seems to be true.  Alas, that is not within our control, nor is it what our consensus is about. 
The consensus, and the subsequent Motion #26 read as follows:
"I move to repeal motion 7 and add the link to greeter emails regarding the newcomer information available."
This accomplishes 2 things quite well, very simply and gracefully in a single sentence.
1.  It repeals Motion #7.  If we do not repeal Motion #7, then it still stands and continues as policy at ASP.  In other words, if we moved to provide a hyperlink to newcomer info for new members, but did not repeal Motion #7, then we would still have the policy to snail mail Newcomer packets to new members.  New rules do not replace old rules, unless the new rules say so.  
2.  The new motion, Motion #26, simply creates a policy that we add a link to our greeter emails providing information for newcomers.  
We know that CAL changes periodically, that WSO changes their website periodically, that details of CAL change periodically, and that we have no control over any of that.  The simplified wording of Motion 26 gives the Steering Committee the ability to link to what they believe is the best information for newcomers at the time, and the ability to make changes or updates to that link without the need to revisit and redo Motion #26 as we are now doing with Motion #7.  
Multi-part motions are quite common in Al-Anon and at ASP.  By my count, 11 of the 25 prior motions had multiple parts.  Four of them actually had numbered lists of the parts of the motion.  
In other words, the current motion follows ASP policy; our consensus contained two parts, and our policy required our motion contain all parts of the consensus.  Any motion that contained less than the full consensus would be invalid and the Chair would be required to
Lastly, there were two parts to the consensus of the discussion on this issue.  Therefore, there MUST be two parts to the motion.  Please read Part B of "Article VII. The Group Conscience process" on our KBDM process webpage where it talks about the development of multiple points in our group consciences.  The two parts of Motion #26 are highly related and interdependent, making them natural, yet separate points in our consensus.  Our KBDM process requires that all points of a consensus are required to be included in the consensus and required to be included in the motion.  Therefore, it would be contrary to our policy to separate them.  Besides, doing so would definitely complicate our decision making and could easily result in conflicting policy.  
Especially, please note the following:

"VII.C.b. The Group Conscience process.  Motions on issues that came from the KBDM phase MUST reflect all points agreed upon in the KBDM phase."

Love and SERENITY,
Steve




-----Original Message-----
From: Businessmtg On Behalf Of Sandie Parkker
Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2023 1:37 PM
To: steve at serenitysys.com
Cc: ASP Business <businessmtg at asp-afg.org>
Subject: [Businessmtg] Rewording the motion

I maintain that physical newcomer packets are different from electronic links and need to be considered to reflect that difference.

I looked up on the Alanon site, we are referencing, at the newcomer link.
There are currently16 different links under the ‘newcomer’ initial heading.  All with different headings from the newcomer physical packet, as Missy described in her previous email on July 16.

NFN, There are also 6 different physical newcomer packets, additionally on the Alanon catalog site.  So the additional newcomer packets may or may not have been created in 2008 when motion number 7 came about, ie:  no date was listed in the catalog anywhere that I looked or found.  So not sure if we know or not, but the newcomer packet we are referring to presently, was the one from the 2008 vote.

All of this information is different under different titles, content and formats and even sites.

In looking up the definition for wordsmithing I found it to say: “it is a skillful use of words; the making of changes to a text to improve clarity and style as opposed to content”.  From your dictionary.com.

As Jerry had previously pointed out on July  27, he was in agreement of the motion being divided up.

I say all of this to say I have a different suggestion how to divide the motion up for clarity.

I don’t understand the reasoning behind not creating two motions at this time, as part of wordsmithing, maybe that will be revealed at another time.

——————————————————————————————————————————-
How about this:  Motion X

Part A of motion X: to repeal motion #7

Part B of same motion X: to add/use newcomer link to ASP greeter email instead of physical packets.
——————————————————————————————————————————
And also, NFN, Missy did mention in her previous email of July 16 the possibility of further review and bring up at the next BM.  I am neutral here.

Thank you for your consideration
____________________________
To Unsubscribe, go to: http://www.asp-afg.org/mailman/listinfo/asp
The ASP web site with all kinds of info for ASP members is http://asp-afg.org/members/ For assistance with other ASP issues, contact Steve the Founder of ASP, at steve at serenitysys.com


-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com