[Businessmtg] Archive Discussion

[Anna]

It was me that mentioned dominance. Seems that’s ruffled feathers. Handling issues that arise are one thing, micromanaging and having access to people’s every word they’ve ever shared spanning back decades is another.

Tammy, you mentioned having to address issues twice since you’ve been LA. Did you need the archives for that?

The Founding Policies for A Serenity Place were mentioned. I noticed this was listed on the website:

- “A Serenity Place is a Closed meeting. Prospective members must affirm their qualification to Al-Anon, according to the Third Tradition, prior to joining this meeting.
- Anonymity is the spiritual foundation of all our Traditions. Repeating of personal shares for any purpose is considered a violation of this tradition.”

If it’s a closed meeting - doesn’t that mean not open for just anyone? For those that are no longer members of ASP, why would we allow their shares to be viewed by anyone currently a member of ASP? That means if someone was a member in 2011, I could go back and read their shares. Even though I have no clue who they are. That doesn’t make me feel secure.

*** I actually went and logged in to check out the archives. I thought this was merely copies of past shares. This comes with shares, names, and email addresses. I could reach out to any of them.

I think #2 sums it up pretty clearly. “Repeating of personal shares for any purpose is considered a violation of this tradition.” - Does “any purpose” not apply to the archives?

Also, I read through the descriptions of the SC positions. It doesn’t mention the archives being used, monitored, needed, or accessed by any of the positions. And if the archives were needed, would the ones going back decades be included in that? I’m confused on what sort of situation would require that, even if were solely for the use of the SC.

Anna

Sent from [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/mail/home) for iOS