Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

I'm reading some things about this working group not having been approved by the GA. I'm not sure if that's accurate or not, but if it is, I would suggest renaming it if your intention is to split from OWS. The death of the movement as a whole will be when people or groups co-opt it without going through the agreed upon process and gaining consensus of the excruciating but necessary general assembly. Chris Hedges warned of this and the only reason the Civil Rights Movement and women's suffrage were successful is because those participating did not put forth their personal agendas and stayed true to the movement's agreed upon agendas.

Please be very careful. I'm already seeing things in the media attributing certain behaviors, actions and statements to OWS as a whole that in some cases are obviously not, and in some cases likely not applicable.

I agree with citizen deb. The man responsible for this went to the GA and announced he was starting a working group called the Demands Working Group. They did not approve the list of demands or even the notion of having a list of demands. They did not approve on or vote on the delegates idea. None of this has been approved by the NYCGA or any other GA anywhere. So, reader beware. This forum is fostering some great discussions, but the fact remains that this working group is just a working group that was formed like two days ago.

The list of demands on here never passed a consensus vote. I believe if they were presented, they would not pass a consensus vote. I also suspect that the person who drafted this knows that and is over riding the voice of the GA to push his own agenda. If this is not so, I challenge him to bring this to the GA as a proposal and see if it passes.

Your entire website is misleading people to assume that this passed the NYCGA. Let's be honest here, It did NOT.

Here is the page the NYC GA put up:http://www.nycga.net/members/the99declaration/profile/

There is no process to approve a working group.

When the working group actually proposes something, the WG "reports back" and the GA votes on it. We are not ready to do that yet.

okay, then, will you put something to that effect on the home page?
for example instead of simply saying:

The purpose of this Working Group is to debate, organize and implement the 99% Declaration which contains a Petition for the Redress of Grievances and an Action Plan:

You could just change it to say:

"The purpose of this Working Group is to debate & organize the 99% Declaration which contains a Petition for the Redress of Grievances and when it is ready, present it to the NYCGA for a consensus vote. If it is passed we will implement the strategies laid forth in the Action Plan.

Please help us to formulate the Declaration to get it ready for a consensus vote."

That would clearly state what is going on (which is a great forum for debating important topics) and end any confusion that these demands are already approved.

thanks for listening

Perhaps, the NYCGA should report to us. By the very nature of their name, they are representing NEW YORK. This group intends to represent the WHOLE. We are all on the same side, are we not? And, before anyone says I'm ungrateful, I absolutely appreciate that NY started the occupation, but it has become bigger than that and rather than claim ownership, perhaps we should ban together. New York is just one city.

Simply put. We have a new website. nycga.net with a forum. The internet working group spent many hours putting this site together so everyone has a voice. All groups have access.

Why is this group not on the consensus web site?

I have sat down with the internet working group. I have sat down with media and PR. For many hours to understand, vote through consensus and plan as a group our next steps. Please join with the nyc general assembly and move this very valuable discussion and direct action to the consensus website.

David

I will put it to a vote

Perhaps, the NYCGA should report to us. By the very nature of their name, they are representing NEW YORK. This group intends to represent the WHOLE. We are all on the same side, are we not? And, before anyone says I'm ungrateful, I absolutely appreciate that NY started the occupation, but it has become bigger than that and rather than claim ownership, perhaps we should ban together. New York is just one city.

In response to your reply: When I posted the above post, this site was claiming to be part of the NYCGA
and in doing so, my point was simple. Truth in advertising, basically. If you claim to be part of something, really be part of it by gaining a consensus vote from the body you claim to represent. It was not a territorial demand or some claim based on the movement supposedly starting in nyc. (the roots were from egypt among other nations, but that is besides the point)

My request was simple. It appears as though the admin for this group listened to mine and others request because it no longer states that this is a working group of the nycga. That much I can see and so take this to mean that the request was honored. So thank you.

I would encourage you still, admin or admins to join with the nyc general asssembly to get feedback on your mission and list of demands. Or the DC Ga or the Detroit GA or .... well just about any GA you can get to.
The reason I am encouraging you to do this is because that is what this movement is based on, a consensus model. I don't believe you really can achieve consensus through the internet. It's kind of beautiful that way.

If you are putting things to a vote, I wonder, if my vote counts. Or am I banned from voting because you only want people who agree with you to vote? I attempted to access the poll and it said this:
You have been banned from this group by the group moderator (Yahoo! ID banned: lmnop). You may not join the group the99declaration. [b]

dear admin, can you explain to the good people why I am being banned from your democratic process?

I'm very happy to participate in this effort whether or not it is an official working group approved by consensus of the NYCGA. I see there is a 99 Declaration Group available on the official nycga.net groups web page which sort of implies there is a connection in some form. Maybe there is a principle such as "diversity of action"? within the core principles that says we don't need to be consensus approved to carry on. Just reading the Principles of Solidarity Working Draft on nycga.net that isn't there but I believe I read something referring to it when it was discussed at GA after the arrests on the Brooklyn Bridge during the Direct Action report back.

Nonetheless - we would of course be better off to reach out to every GA all over everywhere to publicize our efforts and ask for their participation since what we are essentially asking for is for them to be the people who are part of a National General Assembly drawn from the whole country. Have I made a mistake in my assumptions?

I agree. That is the goal, reach out to everyone so we're all on the same page, I think that's in the works.

idenr wrote:I'm very happy to participate in this effort whether or not it is an official working group approved by consensus of the NYCGA. I see there is a 99 Declaration Group available on the official nycga.net groups web page which sort of implies there is a connection in some form. Maybe there is a principle such as "diversity of action"? within the core principles that says we don't need to be consensus approved to carry on. Just reading the Principles of Solidarity Working Draft on nycga.net that isn't there but I believe I read something referring to it when it was discussed at GA after the arrests on the Brooklyn Bridge during the Direct Action report back.

Nonetheless - we would of course be better off to reach out to every GA all over everywhere to publicize our efforts and ask for their participation since what we are essentially asking for is for them to be the people who are part of a National General Assembly drawn from the whole country. Have I made a mistake in my assumptions?

Frankly, I don't care if the NYC GA has approved this. Last time I checked there are Occupy protests around the world and the NYCGA doesn't have a monopoly on organization.

There are folks across the country (including myself) who live in small towns and want to be a part of the 99% but can only do so via the Internet at the time being. NYC is not the end-all, be-all of the 99% or Occupy movements.

I will repeat again, for those of you who didn't get it the first time. NYC is, of course, not the be all or the end all or the beginning all. I was simply asking the admin for this group for truth in advertising. He formerly had a banner on the home page stating that these grievances and this plan had been approved by the NYCGA. It had not been presented as a proposal for consensus vote in that body. Since I and others raised this issue, the admin has changed the masthead on the home page to reflect that this is simply a working group. The grievances listed on this forum have not passed any general assembly consensus yet. Just to be clear, this forum is a place to work on what seems to be a living document which I think (I hope) the admin plans to present eventually to a GA for approval. This is not to say that one person's voice or one communities voice is more important than anothers, but that presenting the proposal in person in front of a general assembly is an important step in gaining true consensus on these ideas. Otherwise, you are participating in a separate movement, which is fine, there is room for many dissenting voices in this world, we all know that! My point being if you are going to use the name of OCCUPY WALLSTREET to promote your agenda, it's important to actually join occupy wallstreet to be a bona fide part of this movement. I hope this is clear! This is a call for solidarity within the movement and non - co- optation of the name without the spirit.

The group is listed on the nycga site as a working group. Anyone can start a working group. You gather consensus for the ideas generated in the working group by reporting back to the GA and getting temperature check from the assembly body. It's how the movement is set up, it's the basic core element of this movement to be based on a consensus model, also known as direct democracy.

If this group would like to really be part of the OWS movement, myself and others suggest that you do regular report backs to a general assembly in your area. If you don't have one, start one. Here is a great video to watch that explains some of the background:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odFygPMwbIM

as always, thanks for listening.

I agree that the NYGA is the NYGA, just like the Wisconsin GA would be the WIGA.

To have us toil, we offer it up and then THEY vote? So we have no vote? That might be democratic amongst the NYers present but that isn't democratic overall.


There needs to be national coordination. It's here. There's a lot going on in NY. They have their hands full being NY. If they are a movement unto themselves, I hope they do great things.

If they are part of the national OWS sentiment, then there needs to be a clearinghouse and it evolved into here. I imagine if we tried to do it, it would never have worked, but there was no intent. Movements are living, evolving things. It brought us to today.

There was a need - a void - to have a place where everyone, regardless of geography can meet, help, talk, think and vote. It's here and it will be at the Convention.

It's important to note that ANYONE is welcome here, to my knowledge no one has been heckled or poorly treated and the process is transparent and democratic.

That is what anyone would want.

To re-invent this, just so NYGA could say they did it. Well, that's ego. We are on their side. If they aren't with us, so be it. It's the land of freedom.

Amen, sister!

Actually, Ken, I have been banned from voting in the polls on this forum. And the first time I tried to join the group my request was denied. It was only after the second try that I was accepted. Others might not be persistent.

"OWS" stands for Occupy Wallstreet. If you want to Occupy the Internet, maybe call it that instead?

In my understanding, "occupy" means a physical occupation.

Also, of course you would have to bring it to a GA to get approval and everyone on this forum would be welcome to participate in that GA. You can also tweet into the GA.

My main point being, if you are going to be part of the movement, and use the name of a specific branch of that movement, be careful that you are actually representing the voice of that branch of the movement. OWS is located in NYC. Occupy DC is in DC, Occupy Oakland is in Oakland and so on.

If you are from all over, then Occupy the Internet seems like the most accurate. Of course, y'all would have to decide that.

Just have integrity in being what you say you are, is my main point. Are you occupying Wallstreet? Physically?
If not, why are you called OWS? think about it.

Lots of things, all at once. Firstly

>>Actually, Ken, I have been banned from voting in the polls on this forum. And the first time I tried to join the group my request was denied. It was only after the second try that I was accepted. Others might not be persistent.<<

If you are talking to me, my name is Kathleen. I'm not insulted, I'm just not sure if you are talking to me or Ken who is a member here, but not me and I don't think involved in this discussion.

Secondly I don't think anyone has been 'banned' from the polls. I realize the computer spit that word out at you, but if you were banned you wouldn't be here. And you wouldn't have gotten in a second time. We grew SO FAST there were technical glitches. To my knowledge, no one has been banned.

Yes, it would be a shame if we lost anyone over a glitch. We do want committed people who don't give up on the first obstacle.


>>"OWS" stands for Occupy Wallstreet. If you want to Occupy the Internet, maybe call it that instead?<<

The media derided the movement because if there were 100 people in the plaza it stood for 95-100 different things. I reject your premise that you own it, define it and are the law on it. Moving on.


>>Also, of course you would have to bring it to a GA to get approval and everyone on this forum would be welcome to participate in that GA. You can also tweet into the GA.<<

The inference here is WE ARE IN CHARGE. A premise also rejected by, well, the world.


>>My main point being, if you are going to be part of the movement, and use the name of a specific branch of that movement, be careful that you are actually representing the voice of that branch of the movement. OWS is located in NYC. Occupy DC is in DC, Occupy Oakland is in Oakland and so on.<<

Partly true, partly not. Occupy DC, for instance, is an easy nomer for organizing DC based groups. However I don't think they would check with you before leaving the border. Again you posit WE ARE IN CHARGE, again I respond ONLY OF YOURSELVES.


>>Just have integrity in being what you say you are, is my main point. Are you occupying Wallstreet? Physically?
If not, why are you called OWS? think about it. <<

Do you represent America and her interests or your own? Think about it. You would rather see this fail then share well, anything. And that speaks volumes.

As for more on the why call it OWS, that was in my other post.

you know I was justs reading some of the posts here; https://www.nycga.net/groups/the-99-declaration/

and I was thinking that the petition should not be called "Declaration" in any way... NYCGA already has a "Declaration" right ?
so that does look like co-opting in a way ... right? change the name it will help ...


also, I have spent quite a bit of time reading through and commenting on OccupyWallSt forum...

I think I understand NYCGA pretty well and I am in solidarity with them... take things slowly in terms getting answers from them... if you rush them you will likely get a no.... understand this... the whole concept about this movement is communication, education, and building contituency... that can only be done slowly... right now we might have 20% of the people, the goal is 99% right... that takes time... prove your solidarity .... and all will fall into place... relax.. just keep in contact... and learn from them... and be part of them .... be in solidarity... right?... they imo REALLY REALLY REALLY know what they are doing...

Hey Katherine, have you ever been to a general assembly? It's the core of this movement. If you haven't, I recommend it, it's kind of amazing to see democracy in action.

I am currently able to post on the forum, but every time I try to vote in the poll I get rejected.

You seem to be missing my point altogether. You seem to be set in your mind of what you "think". Your argument doesn't really seem to take in the point I am trying to make here.

Shall I state it again? This is getting rather tedious.

The only reason I am saying anything at all is because this working group, which by the way is not going to be an official working group of the occupy wallstreet or ows or the nycga for much longer, is using the name of an actual living breathing general assembly which currently meets every night at Liberty Park, NYC. A general assembly that this groups moderators constantly malign at the same time as using the name prominently all over their literature. Hypocritical?

The general assembly of NYC of which this group claims to be speaking for, which it absolutely is not speaking for requires a consensus from the new york city general assembly to be part of it.
You are all welcome to be whatever you want to be, but the people in the general assembly of nyc the occupation of wallstreet, located at Liberty Park, on Broadway and Liberty in lower Manhattan about a block away from ground zero, who have been sleeping on the cold cement and getting arrested and pepper sprayed etc, for a month now, Have worked long and hard on this consensus process.

It has resulted in some basic agreements come about by consensus on what it means to be a working group and how to work within this part of the global movement. Namely this NYC part of the Global movement. If this working group, the demands working group or the 99% working group wants to participate in direct democracy in Liberty park with us, then they, ie you or some representatives from this group are required to report back to the general assembly what they are working on in their working group.

I dont know how to spell it out more clearly than that. Surely you can understand why, if the group you are so attached to defending, without really knowing what is going on, apparently, is going to persist in claiming that they are part of the NYCGA, then they damn well be showing their face in NYC at the god blessed general assembly that is meeting there every damn night in the freezing damn cold hashing out every word of every agreed upon declaration. If you think it's easy to get 200 or 300 people to consent on one proposal which everyone cheers spontaneously upon hearing but then doesn't actually consent to, (happened last night on a non co optation declaration/ proposal) How in the hell you think this group is going to reach consensus on this huge document that you are all so feverishly working on without any input to speak of from the actual group you claim to be representing.

My message is simple, really. Stop claiming to represent NYCGA. You do not. This is a totally separate group with a very different agenda. God bless your mission, happy trails, good luck, blessings all around. Change your name and merry on your way with your delegates and executive committees. Just stop claiming to be speaking for an actual body of people, who are working hard to agree on what we stand for as it is without a bunch of people who are not even physically present claiming to be speaking for us. Do you Grok me, sister? Are you catching my drift yet? Comprehende?? Capiche?

It's fine, do what you want, you're autonomous beings. But you are absolutely not part of NYCGA if you dont come here in person and read your 99% declaration, take notes from the people present if it doesnt pass consensus and go back to the drawing board. This is an interactive body, this is what it is and it aint an internet chat room or forum.

If you dont want your hard work to be decided on by other people, than quit calling your shit nycga. Call it something else and do whatever you want to do. You are pretending to be part of something that you have never even been to and the person who formed this group has been to ONCE. And now refuses to go back because he claims some sort of conspiracy erased his damn report from the damn minutes on the same day that there were thousands of people marching all over our city and everything was freaking crazy and so someone lost track of the five minutes of the 3 hour ga where he announced he had formed a working group. I personally was trying to save a kid who was od-ing that night, but that is an entirely different story.

If you only knew what you were talking about. Then you would really know what you are talking about.


peace out.

i am not clear about how things are supposed to work between working groups and the nycga. there is a user group on the nycga.net site that is titled The 99 Declaration. There is a Demands group. A Media group. A People's New Economic Charter group etc. This implies some kind of okayness at least with this group by at a minimum the people running the nycga.net web.

So can anyone tell me how the relationship functions between nycga and working groups? Are there some working groups whose existence and official connection have been consensed and others that haven't been consensed? Does it matter?

For what it's worth: The vast majority of people don't really know what exactly is going on with the whole Occupy movement, so for them it's easier to refer to the entire revolution as "Occupy Wall Street" doings. I know that the actual OWS people haven't "approved" of the Declaration as part of their movement, but for better or worse, that IS how people are addressing us. We, and OWS itself, should probably just drop the bickering as to who is doing what.

No, sir, I am not confused in the least. I see very clearly what is going on here.

And you, sir, are you the same person, Admin? You are wrong as well. Elected delegates are only ONE way to go.
I believe you are simply being impatient, meaning "you" as in this group, with the process you claim to find brilliant.
Why not trust the process and instead of jumping ahead of it without group consensus, join in the discussion. Many people have already explained ad nauseum on the nycga.cc site why and how on so many levels this plan is flawed.

If you live in Michigan, great, start a general assembly if there is not one already. Work with a group. Get consensus every step of the way. Jumping from local to national before things are done gestating is like ripping a fetus out of a Mother's belly and expecting that baby to thrive. It will die and your premature and unthought out plan will also die without more heads working together on it. Instead of blinding yourself by assuming that our critiques are coming from a territorial or elitist place, why not actually engage in discourse about the very real reasons we are opposed to this plan.

If you really do respect the GA format, if you really do find it incredibly brilliant, than utilize it.

I'm done. I feel I have spoken my piece. I will be at the GA on Sunday, as I am every night. I will be continuing to inform people about this wedge you guys are trying to drive through a very beautiful and hopeful movement.

The urgency to come up with demands is driven by a media based on ADD. We don't have to feed into that.
The media is already showing plenty of intelligent debate based on this movement. I dont have all the answers, no single person does. That's the beauty of it, we are figuring it out together, daily.

If we do trademark a logo, and I hope we do, it will be to protect our movement from being co opted and destroyed by seemingly well intentioned but ill informed people such as yourself. It is not a corporate move. It would be like the union seal of approval. Otherwise, how will people know what is real and what is memorex

There has to be some way to validate that people are speaking for a consensus process and not over riding that with their own agenda, which is, quite frankly what is happening here.

Please don't destroy this movement in it's infancy because you thought you knew better than hundreds of people working hard to give birth to something, the first real chance this country has had in a long time to save ourselves from complete destruction by a government bought and sold on wallstreet.

thanks, as always, for listening. Really listen, please, alot is depending on this.

I am appearing before the NYC General Assembly on Sunday. I appeared on 10-15 and told the about this working group and invited them to join. Michael P

kefranklin wrote:I agree that the NYGA is the NYGA, just like the Wisconsin GA would be the WIGA.

To have us toil, we offer it up and then THEY vote? So we have no vote? That might be democratic amongst the NYers present but that isn't democratic overall.


There needs to be national coordination. It's here. There's a lot going on in NY. They have their hands full being NY. If they are a movement unto themselves, I hope they do great things.

If they are part of the national OWS sentiment, then there needs to be a clearinghouse and it evolved into here. I imagine if we tried to do it, it would never have worked, but there was no intent. Movements are living, evolving things. It brought us to today.

There was a need - a void - to have a place where everyone, regardless of geography can meet, help, talk, think and vote. It's here and it will be at the Convention.

It's important to note that ANYONE is welcome here, to my knowledge no one has been heckled or poorly treated and the process is transparent and democratic.

That is what anyone would want.

To re-invent this, just so NYGA could say they did it. Well, that's ego. We are on their side. If they aren't with us, so be it. It's the land of freedom.

I agree.

I am someone who would like to be a part of this, but is absolutely stumped over why we are even having this discussion.

In YahooGroups, someone specifically investigated how this group came to be. Someone from the Internet Group of the actual Occupy Wall Street community in NYC who's name started with a D (I don't have time to go back through all that mess to find it but you are welcome to) formed the working groups on the internet under Occupy Wall Street NYC and this group (The 99% Declaration Working Group) was formed under that umbrella. Michael took that idea and ran with it.

As I suggested on the NYC site, if NYC's intention was to CONTROL the rest of the Occupy movements in the United States, they should not have created the NYC site and asked people to volunteer their time and hard work for groups without the caveat that any ideas or creations must first be authorized by the OWS NYC GA. Volunteering for groups usually means work is going to be done.

Michael made the point somewhere (YahooGroups or here, I can't remember but you are welcome to look it up) indicating:

1. Work was done on this declaration (that everyone in NYC is so upset about).
   
2. He went to the NYC GA and handed out some copies so people would have it as a REFERENCE DOCUMENT when he got up to stand before the NYC GA.
   
3. It was voted down by the NYC GA.
   
4. Someone from the media got a hold of the original proposition when it was handed out and published it, which became the fracturing point between NYC and everyone else who does believe in it.

I am a little more than concerned that NYC believes it has the right to determine the future for the other 49 states in this country. I DON'T have a problem with them looking at Michael's document and saying they don't want to endorse it -or- have anything to do with it. I have a problem with them saying because they don't want to endorse it no other Occupy movement in the United States has the right to support it. This is what is being portrayed in this thread, that all other Occupy movements DO NOT have the right to support a document that we feel supports our desired outcome. Is that really the way you want to represent OWS NYC? Is that the reputation you want them to have?

I am in the process of trying to hook up with my closest registered group which is 30 minutes away from my house. I have a LOT of physical challenges, am in a hideous amount of pain that I can't take medication for and I'm not sure I'm going to be able to make it back home with the amount of gas left in my tank, but I'm going to do it anyhow. I would hate to have to carry the message that OWS NYC has put strict regulations on what Occupy movements can or cannot read - that's too much like burning books. My Occupy movement might have their own declaration they feel strongly about. At least this forum gives them an OPPORTUNITY to be a part of the declaration discussion and add in things that are close to their hearts.

This forum that has been created is the most efficient gathering place I have found out of all the other NYC provided sites on the internet (WordPress is NOT cutting it). The fact that someone is willing to create a conference call to include all the other Occupy movements is not only necessary, but the first time someone has actually CARED enough to include all the other Occupy movements in the discussion.

As far as Occupy the Internet, this cannot be done. The OWS NYC has already taken that group (See Facebook). I, for one, desire a working Occupy the Internet group (not owned by OWS NYC) to allow people such as myself to have a voice, that would be listed on the Occupy Together web site. Unfortunately, all the Occupy the Internet/Online twitter accounts, URLs and Facebook accounts have been taken and are being used for several random things that don't reflect a specific body of users.

There are too many good resources in this forum, too many incredibly talented and smart people who want to see actual change occur. We don't want to have to go through another 4 years of the political status quo, which is probably going to turn into another GOP 4 year reign since Wall Street has put all candidates on notice that they will withdraw all campaign funds of anyone who shows favor to the Occupy Wall Street Movement or any of their ideals. I would hate to think this movement mimics the very 1% we are revolting against, but this is the impression I'm getting from the people representing OWS NYC in this forum.