please clear up some confusion

Post new topic   Reply to topic

View previous topic View next topic Go down

please clear up some confusion

Post by Jesse on Wed Oct 19, 2011 11:08 pm

I do not know what consensus you all as a working group have come to, or what consensus you have had at the nycga or with any group outside of this group. and actually, i think there are many who have read your declaration and are confused and concerned.

Someone came to the google group for the politics and electoral reform working group and posted this url: https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/

There is confusion as to whether this is a finished draft of a declaration, and whether this draft is a product of NYCGA consensus, etc.

The issue is that many who read this may assume you are speaking for the NYCGA, yet your ideas about having a delegation is something that some may like and others may not, and I personally (maybe I'm dense) am not at all clear on who is making these decisions and who has come to consensus on them.

Basically, I'm saying this. Maybe none of us have agreed to any rules, so you may have no obligation to seek NYCGA consensus. But there is a lot of confusion about who you are speaking for and I think you might be doing yourselves (who support the work of this working group) a huge disservice if you don't make things a lot more clear. At the least I would suggest a header clarifying this at: https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/

Jesse

Posts: 11
Join date: 2011-10-19

Back to top Go down

follow up

Post by Jesse on Thu Oct 20, 2011 12:03 am

having read some of the (quite defensive) responses to concerns like mine being posted here, i think you should consider not blaming those who are confused, but instead taking responsibility for a failure to carefully communicate and take all possible actions to clarify. i say this not only because i think it is right, but because i see a real danger of this issue undermining the goals of this working group and the movement as a whole.

it seems that this working group was recognized by consensus at the GA. but many people at the nycga would expect that a plan which can easily be perceived as speaking for the NYCGA, and one which would have a substantial impact on occupations everywhere, would seek consensus at the nycga and probably at all occupations that were implied to be participating in these efforts.

im really just trying to help you understand the concerns that are arising. good luck!

Jesse

Posts: 11
Join date: 2011-10-19

Back to top Go down

This issue has been debated to death already!

Post by RayArrowood on Sun Oct 23, 2011 8:23 pm

Your questions have been answered a number of times already. Unfortunately, Michael deleted the mailing list where this issue was first discussed when he quit. That message thread should probably be posted in the forum.

Have you considered that this forum, Michael's mailing list and the NYC GA have most likely been infiltrated by people trying to divide the group using dissension topics like this one? If you really care about the movement and aren't here to disrupt the group, give this topic a rest please.

RayArrowood

Posts: 233
Join date: 2011-10-18
Age: 62
Location: US Nomadic

http://the-utopian.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

:)

Post by Jesse on Sun Oct 23, 2011 8:28 pm

Please note the dates of my posts. And lets remember we are all working together.

Jesse

Posts: 11
Join date: 2011-10-19

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

Permissions in this forum:
You can reply to topics in this forum