[top-politics] Re: DP-based-collectives instead of FA/DP

AbdLomax — 2006-11-01 05:34:41+0100

At 02:44 PM 10/31/2006, Gordan Ponjavic wrote: >How does FA organisation starts? Is it deliberative process, or ad hoc >intuition based? Is communication between Emmanuel and me origin of >some virtual FA? What is a definition of FA? Sorry if I ask you to >repeat yourself on and on, but I still find FA only as a global concept >of pluralism acknowledgemnt.

I’m glad Gordan has asked this question. I was active in the Election Methods community for about a year before someone finally started asking questions. Until then, I was just plugging away at explaining FA/DP to people who were only occasionally listening. Then Jan Kok finally said, “Hmmm… maybe this is interesting.” And he asked a series of questions, the answers to which became a FAQ on FA/DP, it can be found on the wiki, http://beyondpolitics.org/wiki.

The model FA, as far as my own process has been concerned, is Alcoholics Anonymous. I came up with Free Association to describe an organization which is using the Traditions of AA, as found in the writings of Bill Wilson, and which are available on the Web as “Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions,” and “Twelve Concepts for World Service.” I’d provide URLs if I had the time….

Of course, AA is about people who have “a desire to stop drinking,” and what I’ve done is to generalize these concepts for wider application. But AA is probably the largest FA in existence, it is huge, many millions of people have been involved at one time or other.

Read more… / Lire plus…

The FA traditions actually describe, roughly, once one realizes it, what is normal for small peer associations when they are new, when they are informal, when they have not crystallized a control structure. However, when the need comes for the organization to grow, and especially when it starts to collect resources for expenditure by majority vote (or through other common mechanisms), organizations leave behind this “state of nature.”

I’m saying that it is not only possible to keep to this non-coercive state, it has been tried, by AA, and it has been highly successful and effective.

It would be useful to go over the Traditions (the Steps don’t have much to do with what we are discussing, it is the organization itself that the Traditions are about and that is what is primarily of interest to us here), but it deserves more careful writing than I can devote tonight. I’ll give, however, some characteristics:

The organization does not collect dues or fees, it operates on voluntary donations. It will not accept large donations, preferring to remain independent of individual donors, who often tend to want to gain control with their support. AA meetings prefer, generally, to pay rent, even though many churches, for example, are ready to offer free space to them. Once again, they learned early on that TANSTAAFL, free rent often came with strings. But there is no rigid rule, some meetings do take place in donated space, it is just a general preference and principle: meetings should be independent.

The organization does not amass resources beyond a “prudent reserve.”

“Our leaders are but trusted servants, they do not govern.”

“AA as such ought never be organized, but we may create service boards or committees directly responsible to those they serve.”

So AA has a general Conference once a year, regions send delegates who, it is recommended, are elected by supermajority or, in the alternative, a coin toss among the top two vote-getters. This Conference does not tell local meetings what to do. Rather, it is a means for the “group conscience,” it is called, to express itself.

“For our group purpose we have but one authority, God as he may express himself through our group conscience.”

The God part puts some people off. But notice that it is not “God” which is the authority in practice, it is the group conscience. AA is thoroughly democratic, and it is not a theocracy. Indeed, much of the AA writing about God makes it explicit that God is “as we understand God,” and thus for many members “God” is nothing other than the group itself. For AA, “God” is a “Higher Power,” and “Higher”, when push comes to shove, means something greater than the individual. AA started as an offshoot of the Oxford Group, which was a Christian revival movement, but it quickly transcended its origin. Nevertheless, traces of it remain in how the Steps and Traditions were worded. Other groups using the AA traditions have often freely translated these terms in a way more universally acceptable sixty years later.

FAs start whenever people begin to discuss a topic and start to consider themselves as a group. AA started, the story goes, when Bill Wilson, having discovered that the only thing that kept him sober was trying to help others stay sober — he had, shall we say, a serious drinking problem — found the man known as Dr. Bob, who was a surgeon who had just about ruined his life with drinking. Bill managed to sober up Dr. Bob and Dr. Bob got it. He also understood how helping other alcoholics would help himself. These two became the core, and others naturally followed.

FA/DP, we are suggesting, should be understood and could be useful to any people who want to start a peer association. FA/DP is certainly not for everything, but it is at worst harmless, FA/DP organizations can and will start traditional organizations, the “service boards or committees” that the Tradition refers to.

The Twelfth Tradition is “Anonymity is the spiritual foundation of our traditions, ever reminding us to place principles before personalities.” This one is commonly misunderstood. AA membership is generally anonymous, hence the name, but this is only secondarily for the protection of the alcoholic. It is primarily for the protection of the group. AA is not about charismatic leaders, though, if you go to AA meetings (there are plenty of open AA meetings, i.e., you don’t have to be an alcoholic to go to these) you will find plenty of quite charismatic people. You will never find someone, however, presented as a model AA member, or speaking on behalf of AA. Someone who does that, you may suspect is an imposter.

FAs, following AA, don’t take positions in matters of controversy. If they did so, they would divide the membership, using the group reputation opposing the opinions of some members. FAs don’t, as the FA as a whole, recommend or endorse outside organizations. Informally, of course, they may point to resources, but solely as a matter of information, not of recommendation. There are no “AA-recommended” rehabs. But, of course, many rehab hospitals have been started by AA members acting independently, as the “service boards” mentioned. And any AA member can recommend anything he chooses to you. The stricture against AA itself getting involved in controversy does not prevent members from doing so. And get involved they do. The Alcoholism Council in Marin County, where I attended many AA meetings — as a non-alcoholic — was essentially an AA activity, where AA members, together with others, did what AA itself could not do: influence public policy and legislation.

The term Free Association is a happy one, I think. Free Associations stay clear of what can easily entangle less restricted organizations. The Association is restricted, not the members. And, of course, the members can form any kind of organization they like, with and among the people they meet in the FA, and we believe that DP will facilitate the formation of such organizations, as the “muscle” of this society, with the FA being the intelligence. Intelligence and communication are almost equivalent. We have individual intelligence because of the communication between nerve cells….

>Do you understand FA/DP enough to exlpain them easily to third party? >It might be I am slow thinker in this field, of course.

What I’m doing continually is explaining FA/DP to anyone who will listen, and often, too often, to people who won’t.

If you are a slow thinker, you can contribute greatly by asking questions.

While FA/DP is actually extremely simple, it enters unfamiliar territory for most people. It seems to take a lot of repetition before people start to understand it. There are many assumptions that people make about politics and about organizations in general that prevent easy understanding.

One neighbor commented, when I explained delegable proxy to her, “Oh, I could never give my vote to anyone else.” As if she had not already done that whenever she voted for, say, a representative to Congress. She did live in a Town Meeting town, where she could directly vote on town issues, but I think she rarely attended that meeting, and proxy voting is not allowed (generally true in the U.S.) But the state government and, of course, the federal government are all representative democracy, where elected representatives vote on behalf of their constituents. Delegable proxy, of course, gives you the right to choose who votes for you, and only when you don’t vote yourself. If you vote yourself, your proxy’s vote is not expanded by yours. For that poll.

> > In theory, as well, anyone at a sufficient level of influence in > > any existing organization might be able to start this up. > >What is “THIS”?

“This” would be a DP structure, in particular. But more generally, it would be an FA that is parallel to the existing organization. It is happening as we speak, it seems. The Center for Range Voting is in the process of creating a formal corporation, and a Range Voting Free Association has been started by an active Range advocate to advise the CRV and its own members in relationship to Range Voting study and advocacy. The RVFA has no specific membership requirements, you can be opposed to Range Voting and join. A proxy list has been established.

Will it go anywhere? Maybe.

> All I could see from you was initiative where I have to >say my DP is Markus Schatten for an example. What else do you offer to >me as a person with lets say sufficient >level of influence? What can we do right here right now that would make >top-politics more efficient? Lets do it!

I don’t have the time to do anything more than advise. Setting up a Top Politics Free Association would not hurt. All you need is a means of communication — this list can serve as a meeting — and a proxy list. The proxy list can be anywhere, it is a database with four recommended fields:
MemberHandle, NominatedProxyMemberHandle, AcceptanceByProxy, Comment

The rest is details. However, acceptance by the nominated proxy should be considered an agreement to accept communication in both directions. If you name someone as your proxy, you are giving that person permission to directly contact you. And the person should have your direct contact information. Likewise, the acceptance indicates that the proxy will accept direct communication from you as well. Presumably this communication will enjoy response. If it doesn’t work out, the Member can change the proxy assignment at any time. The proxy can also withdraw acceptance….

One method for creating a proxy list would simply be to have a mailing list for that purpose. To create a proxy assignment record, one would mail to this list with the four field above, perhaps comma-delimited. Indeed, they might all be in the Subject header. The most recent mail supersedes any prior assignments. But there are many ways to do it, what is essential is that the database be public, at least for all the members.

The DP structure makes the organization practically bulletproof against, say, hostile takeover, or central communications failure. It makes the central communications structure useful but not absolutely essential, it can be replaced at any time, at least as far as members who have named a proxy are concerned. Those who have not might be out in the cold….

> > But, for > > a number of reasons, I’m not expecting this; nevertheless, it could > > happen. (Existing organizations have an existing power structure, and > > those with influence in that structure are not usually very > > interested in something that would replace it. At best, they don’t > > see the necessity. There are exceptions. For example, I’ve seen > > interest from members of the boards of Waldorf Schools. The proposal > > was for a Parent Association that was FA/DP. It could solve a number > > of common problems with parent involvement in these private schools. > >Isnt FA/DP only communication protocol? I mean, only ground for setting >any organisation, right? I mean, it seems it misses decision making >process from point A to realisation of point A. Right? So, what do you >offer? Offer it to TOP-politics. I am eager to see it. Really.

What I’m offering is advice. I’m not going to start the Top Politics FA. Been there, done that. I’ve started quite a few FAs, but…. let’s say the time was not ripe for them. Some of them, it is still possible that they could fire up. But too much depended on me. And that’s not the point.

So if you want this, want to try it, set up a proxy list. I’ll be happy to answer questions.

The tools for proxy expansion in polls may, indeed, come from this group, people here are working on this kind of thing. But it is not a difficult problem, and we have assumed that, when it is needed, it will be easy to use the proxy list to actually expand votes.

Of course, what is also needed is public record of actual votes, i.e., databases of the form
MemberHandle, Vote.

[…] >When I read this, it seems to me you are calling people out to hang out >and create “friendships” that would enable them social engagenement >through informal social structures that exist in any village.

Yes, that is what it amounts to. But formalized slightly, in a way that makes it possible to measure consensus.

>I do not understand you completely, or maybe I do not understand you at >all. So, could you please tell me step by step what I do have to do to >start FA and what are exact (we are not talking about results if it >works, but measaruble) things we will gain.

If you mean here, the FA already exists. What does not exist is the proxy list. Start that and you will see.

What does it cost?

What you will gain is the possibility that a larger group than those immediately active could form. It may not make a difference at this time, but give this a few years and I think you would see a big difference. People read this list and then move on, do something else. What if you could keep these people peripherally involved. That is, available when needed. Not having to follow the list traffic to keep their toe in the water.

> Oh yes. There is new site >pollitika.com that gathers several political blogers in Croatia and >several people from Croatia political forums that have some will to >move on. Could I offer them anything that they will see as concrete >benefit without need of “faith” or other if/then/else stuff that is far >from popular?

Right now, just try to understand FA, DP, and the implications. There is writing on the Beyond Politics web site, but also in many other places, such as the Election Methods mailing list. Search Google for “FA/DP,” you will find a lot. Likewise search for “Delegable Proxy.”

I think anyone considering forming a peer association should understand this stuff. But few do.

>:-) for new daughter :-)

Thanks. I’ll give her a hug. She likes hugs and kisses. We have a word book, pictures with words, and I read that to her every night, i.e., we look at the pictures and say the words. She is three years old, she is learning English very rapidly. It seems her favorite words in the book are “hug” and “kiss.” When we look at the pictures, she will say the words and then hug me and kiss me.

>So, there are two virtual entities. One is top-politics, another one is >that pollitika where we could use usefull organisational concepts in >real life. Another thing is creation of common vision, mission, >strategy, yet I am not sure that is the right way right now as long as >there is too many maybies and too many people with storng opinions that >wont change their thoughts that easily if there is no concrete wall >before them. So, maybe it is the best to be pragmati and move step by >step with a feeling of a common thing.

Yes. Please also, if you have not done so, register on the BeyondPolitics.org wiki (at http://beyondpolitics.org/wiki). Let us know of any related activities that start up. Registration will allow you to edit the wiki, should you desire to do so, and it will also allow us to contact you if we think there is something you should know. You could also name a proxy to BeyondPolitics.org, if you like. I’m not sure if a proxy list has been set up yet. You could do it if you have time!

(There are proxy lists on some of the subdomain wikis that have been set up for various purposes, but setting one up for BP itself has not seemed like a priority, yet. BP is an FA/DP organization though, we will recognize proxy votes and will assume the delegability of same.)

[top-politics] Re: DP-based-collectives instead of FA/DP

Gordan Ponjavic — 2006-10-31 20:44:48+0100

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:

> At 04:59 AM 10/18/2006, Gordan Ponjavic wrote: > > >Hmh. It might be off topic question to this discussion, but I have > >noticed you did not answer the questions about strategy of > >implementation of your interests. > > What questions?

OK. It was about possiblities of cooperation and exact proposal. It seems you did respond to them in following text. (It would be great thing to enable tagging posts in order of easier search :-))

> >Is that beacuse you are not interested in it right now, becuase you do > >not see yourself as an element who is going to realize your vision, or > >some other reason? > > The vision includes some concept of how to get from here to there. > Seeds are being sown. Many of these will not germinate. It only takes > one to further the plan. Efforts continue to find that one, several > initiatives per year are being proposed. Some have clearly failed to > go anywhere. Others still exist in potential, they might or might not > become viable demonstrations.

Read more… / Lire plus…

Cool.

> The FA/DP concepts are generic organizational concepts. I have > extensive experience with FAs, including the international > organizational level; however, at the time that I was involved, I did > not have sufficient understanding of the DP possibilities to > introduce them. I was in a position that I could have done it, if I > had known then what I know now. I could attempt to return to that > position; however, it would be disengenuous. I was what I was at the > time because of the work I was actively doing in the specific field > involved. I’m not doing that work now. Essentially, it would be > almost a full-time job to return.

How does FA organisation starts? Is it deliberative process, or ad hoc intuition based? Is communication between Emmanuel and me origin of some virtual FA? What is a definition of FA? Sorry if I ask you to repeat yourself on and on, but I still find FA only as a global concept of pluralism acknowledgemnt.

> At this point my focus is on the theoretical level. I am attempting > to spread the theoretical understanding of FA/DP. Sooner or later > someone will attempt to apply these concepts; the theory is that this > will enhance the probability of organizational success for whoever tries it.

Do you understand FA/DP enough to exlpain them easily to third party? It might be I am slow thinker in this field, of course.

> In theory, as well, anyone at a sufficient level of influence in > any existing organization might be able to start this up.

What is “THIS”? All I could see from you was initiative where I have to say my DP is Markus Schatten for an example. What else do you offer to me as a person with lets say sufficient
level of influence? What can we do right here right now that would make top-politics more efficient? Lets do it!

> But, for > a number of reasons, I’m not expecting this; nevertheless, it could > happen. (Existing organizations have an existing power structure, and > those with influence in that structure are not usually very > interested in something that would replace it. At best, they don’t > see the necessity. There are exceptions. For example, I’ve seen > interest from members of the boards of Waldorf Schools. The proposal > was for a Parent Association that was FA/DP. It could solve a number > of common problems with parent involvement in these private schools.

Isnt FA/DP only communication protocol? I mean, only ground for setting any organisation, right? I mean, it seems it misses decision making process from point A to realisation of point A. Right? So, what do you offer? Offer it to TOP-politics. I am eager to see it. Really.

> I made some headway at the local school, but …. our daughter is no > longer attending that school, and, while substantial interest was > expressed, not enough interest existed for the effort to proceed > without my pushing it. > > Once an FA/DP parent association was going, it should be easy to > maintain, DP is designed for that. What exists at this school, > instead, is a Parent Council which consists of representatives > supposedly elected by the parents of students, class by class. Over > the years, these Parent Councils go in and out of existence; they > function when there is a parent or two sufficiently interested to > make it work, but, even then, participation is very low. They think > that the solution is to try harder to get parents to participate. > It’s not going to happen. Most parents are too busy. The key to the > FA/DP solution is that only a few parents need actively participate, > but a network is created that connects all the parents who have any > interest. Many have some interest, they just don’t have the time to > go to meetings, which tend to be boring, anyway. > > And then, of course, when the board makes a decision that the parents > don’t understand, the parents are upset and something happens for a > while. The key, I believe, is to connect people before there is a > problem; when there is a problem, such as an allegedly abusive > teacher, the various camps circle the wagons, each group defending > its own interests.

When I read this, it seems to me you are calling people out to hang out and create “friendships” that would enable them social engagenement through informal social structures that exist in any village. Where we have Mirko and Slavka who keep an eye at what is going on at school and spread stuff on coffee sessions. If Mirko and Slavka say, no, no, no, school principle has to obey them as long as community wont tolerate “ignorant” principle.

> The parents, in fact, have nearly all the power, > in the end, because it is the parents who pay the bulk of the bills, > but the parents have no means of functioning as a coherent group > except for the very weak Parent Council. > > These schools typically begin with a very active parent group that > does everything to get the school going. Gradually, over the years, > volunteer functions are replaced with staff positions, and, > gradually, parent involvement becomes less and less. And so tuition > increases, among other problems. Parents move from a sense that this > is “our school,” at the beginning, to one that this is “their” > school, take it or leave it. > > FA/DP organization is, in my opinion, a realization of part of the > social vision of Rudolf Steiner, who originally founded the first > Waldorf School in the 1920s in Germany. It is the missing element, > the absence of which has kept his three-fold social order from > becoming a practical reality (technically, the three-fold order is > natural, it already exists, but it is most frequently dysfunctional, ill). > > Without FA traditions, the structures become rigid, crystallized, > with defacto oligarchies developing, and without DP, the maintenance > of consensus becomes too much of an organizational burden. > > Another project was the Cummington Free Association, intended to be a > model of how a small town could transform local politics, though > “politics” is a mit of a misnomer. Essentially, these organizations > would be facilitators of communcation between the citizens of the > town and the town government. Cummington is a Town Meeting town, that > is, the government is by Town Meeting, at which any registered voter, > resident in the town, may vote, there is no Mayor or City Council. > Yet it is quite common that Town Meeting votes one way and, when > state law requires a decision to be submitted to the voters for > ratification by secret ballot (such as tax increases), the voters > vote differently. It is quite easy to understand why. DP could make > this rare. It does not require any changes in law, all that is > necessary is that there be an efficient, easy, way for the citizens > to collectively deliberate and discover consensus. The key word is > efficient. There is already a way for them to collectively > deliberate, if they have the time to attend town meeting. Which > most of them do not, most of the time. > > But I’ve moved from Cummingon to Northampton, a much larger town, > governed by Mayor/Council. I’ll probably start something here. > Meanwhile, the Cummington Free Association is dormant. Once again, > there was some interest, but not enough for it to proceed without my > active involvement. Essentially, the seed has not germinated.

I do not understand you completely, or maybe I do not understand you at all. So, could you please tell me step by step what I do have to do to start FA and what are exact (we are not talking about results if it works, but measaruble) things we will gain. Oh yes. There is new site pollitika.com that gathers several political blogers in Croatia and several people from Croatia political forums that have some will to move on. Could I offer them anything that they will see as concrete benefit without need of “faith” or other if/then/else stuff that is far from popular?

> >As long as I am rather interested in operational plan of how I am going > >to realise my interests, I understand that I am going to need help of > >others. One of these others, if you find your interest in cooperation > >is you. Of course, this might function rather well if you see such > >interest. > > > >So, the basic question really is. Are you interested in cooperation? > > Of course. What can I do to help? I have already intended to look > into tiaktiv. However, my time is quite limited at this point. We > just adopted another daughter, this one from Ethiopia, we just moved > and have a house to set up, etc….. plus I have a business to run, > which has been much neglected. That can’t go on long.

:-) for new daughter :-)

So, there are two virtual entities. One is top-politics, another one is that pollitika where we could use usefull organisational concepts in real life. Another thing is creation of common vision, mission, strategy, yet I am not sure that is the right way right now as long as there is too many maybies and too many people with storng opinions that wont change their thoughts that easily if there is no concrete wall before them. So, maybe it is the best to be pragmati and move step by step with a feeling of a common thing.

ATB,
Gale