[Imc] conflict resolution -- local and global:

[Mike Lehman]

My reaction to the idea of another, apparently seperate conflict
resolution structure is that the one we already have, that meets weekly,
should be a place to start in any case. The Steering group represents a
broad spectrum of opinion and has handled a number of controversial
issues fairly and effectively in the past.

Even assuming there might be a need for yet another piece of structure
to deal with issues of conflict resolution, I would hope and expect that
it be called into play only after other already established means of
conflict resolution have failed.

So far, it is unclear just what specifically the proposed additional
conflict resolution body would do. Despite a request by me that any
specific past failings of the Steeering group to resolve known problems
be documented, since such unresolved problems have never been
articulated at a Steering group meeting, there has yet to be any such
information brought to the attention of the Steering group, as a group.
And we act as a group, not as individuals, so someone, somehow, has to
bring an unresolved problem to the Steering group in order to have any
expectation that it will be addressed.

If the problem is that some particular decision has rubbed someone the
wrong way, I respectfully remind everyone that all they need to do is
show up for the Steering group meeting, (almost) any Sunday at noon.
Some people may believe that it is some sort of elite group that makes
all the decisions at the IMC. That is simply untrue. It coordinates the
decisions that the working groups themselves make autonomously, so even
if you have no desire to come to a Steering group meeting, you can still
be a quite active participant in any one of the numerous working groups,
which also operate by consensus. While at least one spoke from each of
the various working groups is required to be there in order to insure a
quorum to make decisions, the Steering group is actually...YOU!

That's right, EVERYBODY is a member of the Steering group, IF they show
up. It functions by consensus, so even one person, who does NOT have to
be a spoke, left unsatisfied prevents a decision from being finalized.
The reason your concerns aren't being heard may simply be because you
haven't shown up.

And I can't emphasize enough that this structure was decided on by the
membership as a whole and has been essentially reconfirmed twice now. If
it was broke, it would've been fixed. While we certainly need to
continue putting every effort into making the IMC, as a whole, and the
Steering group, in particular, groups that welcome and encourage
participation, this is a two-way street. And we are working on new ways
to make sure that people's voices are heard.

However, no one can force anyone to participate. The way decisions are
made at the IMC is based on personal participation. It's very difficult
to transform such a structure into one where non-participation becomes
the dominant mode of production... and I'm not sure that's what anyone
wants anyway. Something like that smacks of a top-down,
overly-structured imposition of other people's ideas on the people
willing to show up and do the work.

What this has to do with global issues is something I can't comment on,
not being an active participant there. But I don't presume to know
what's good for them, either.
Mike Lehman