Handy Dandy Guide for Proposals

[Dan L]

From watching the General Assemblies, it might be helpful to come up with a helpful set of guidelines to help people understand ways to get their proposals from thought into a workable idea. We should cover things like:

• How much stuff you can get into a single proposal?
  
• Importance of yes/no positions
  
• Anticipating blocking concerns
  
• Importance of Language
  
• How to deal with a evolving process
  
• How to work with the facilitation team to get on stack early
  
• Other things you think of that I haven't thought of (only human)
  

Also, in these check ins for process, we have the opportunity to explain process to more and more people. The more people who know the process, the more people who help us do this thing right!

Much love, fellow facilitators.

[rebecca]

Indeed. We talked about this some during this afternoon's training. It seems at least several of us feel it would be helpful, and maybe we can get into the details of it in one of the next working group meetings.

In the co-ops where I was trained, there was a specific format for proposals that included:
- What you are proposing that we do
- Why you think we should do it
- List of pros and cons (This goes a long way to get the proposer to anticipate the group's concerns)
- Considerations (likely results of passing the proposal that are not clearly pro or con, but worth thinking about; and possibly-important unknowns about what may happen as a result)

If we were to adopt that format, or another one that someone else suggests, I don't know what would be the best way to get it out there to everyone. Announcements alone might not do it. Put it in the revised brochure? Another big sign? We're getting to have plans for kind of a lot of big signs.

Dan, I'd like to hear more about what you mean by "how to deal with an evolving process." Do you mean being prepared for people to suggest amendments to a proposal?

Thanks for raising this.

[Dan L]

I think when we talk to people about 'evolving process', I mean that we have to get people in a frame of mind that accepts that things will happen that they did not count on and what the facilitators will be doing will also change. Nobody is changing process just to do it or to seize control for themselves- but things might not go down in the way that they planned it when they were in their WG meeting.

[Emma]

thanks for these thoughts. I'd very much be on board with this.

Do we have a facilitation meeting scheduled for today?

[Emma]

I'd like to point to the Occupation Working Group's handling of the decision about where to have the occupation as a very well presented item. It can't quite be called a proposal, exactly, and perhaps that's a good bit of why it worked so well. Maybe when we come to the GA thinking we've worked it all out and just need approval, we are acting with too much hubris. Maybe presenting the issue, presenting our research and opinions and other considered options, etc, like Dan is describing here, needs a word other than "proposal" to describe it more accurately? I know it's sorta semantics, but sometimes with this kind of work semantics matters. We've stuck with "proposal" because it clearly eliminates "discussion topic" but that is also kind of a double-edged sword.

Lots to discuss & revisit when we next meet.

[mikerancourt]

I've been working on this, but it's not very useful yet because I can't help but get bogged down in collective theory as I go.
A good proposal understands what constitutes the group and doesn't ask the assembly to consent to anything beyond that. Every proposal we've bickered about so far has been met with opposition that characterized parts of it as not consistent with what the objector thinks we're about. The thing is, they're not wrong. Maybe we're wrong in trying to push through proposals without respecting the process as a way of exploring who we are. I've always said that the greatest thing about consensus-based decision making is that it privileges process over product. If the product were the most important part, we'd just elect the most eloquent and media fit candidate to tell us what to do. Then that person would hire a security force to make sure we do it. The beauty of the collective process is that we are the ones working things out. Unfortunately, we have time-sensitive issues that make the birthing pains excruciating.
So, how does a WG or individual construct a successful proposal? Appeal to who the group is. We're not all buddhists or new age therapists, so we take exception to language that says this is a "healing movement." We don't all understand the criminalization of the poor and people of color, so that's not a central, organizing idea that PR is prepared to release to the public yet. We don't all understand what a Robin Hood Tax is or why Adbuster's thinks it should be at the center of our first demand (and we don't all realize that making a demand on a broad issue is a PR move), so we stymie Ben's proposal and frustrate him and a lot of people.
Yes, I think Dan's list is a very good start for developing guidelines for proposals, and I think Rebecca's outline is great, but proposals will be very painful until we all understand who we are (and how the process works).

[hz]

I think it could be helpful for the Facilitation working group to -help- speakers decide whether something is a proposal or an announcement. Beforehand would be fine, but if it has to be during, I still believe it may cut down on a lot of unnecessary problems that are not germane to the actual 'proposal/ statement'

This is especially troublesome to me as PR, because I feel like I am morally bound to officially present anything that was proposed and then consensed, when many times it is actually just an announcement, not a consensed decision. Other reporters will also be periodically in the GA. They will also be our voice to the public. So this distinction has the possibility of affecting not only our group, but our message to the world.

I will be at the facilitation working group meeting today (at 4:30?)
and if you could schedule a moment for me to give a brief mention of why paying attention to the manner of facilitation may affect our public message as a whole, that would be great.

-Hz

[benbrucato]

Oct 24, 2011 8:39:53 GMT -5 Emma said:

I'd like to point to the Occupation Working Group's handling of the decision about where to have the occupation as a very well presented item. It can't quite be called a proposal, exactly, and perhaps that's a good bit of why it worked so well. Maybe when we come to the GA thinking we've worked it all out and just need approval, we are acting with too much hubris. Maybe presenting the issue, presenting our research and opinions and other considered options, etc, like Dan is describing here, needs a word other than "proposal" to describe it more accurately? I know it's sorta semantics, but sometimes with this kind of work semantics matters. We've stuck with "proposal" because it clearly eliminates "discussion topic" but that is also kind of a double-edged sword.

Lots to discuss & revisit when we next meet.

These are great ideas. Sometimes things need to happen a little faster, and coming prepared with an already-worded proposal makes things easier to deliberate. I think both have their place, and the Occupation WG approach works in most scenarios. I like the idea of this working as a model, and perhaps anything that falls outside of it will require its own justification before proposing specific language. Good ideas all around.

[hz]

Ben,

Yes!

I think we are working it out (well between you and me anyway : ) )

Maybe we can meet offline soon, and see if we can rally together, and try to understand the nuances of our differences!

Understand that I am not trying to block your specific direct actions, but it perhaps it may be more accurately called a meta-block on the way the proposal happens and goes through, and the wording that it makes me, as PR bound to.

This, to me, is still an important 'blocking concern'. But I would like to bring it to -facilitation- as a whole to decide, not the GA. If they will have a moment to entertain it. If you will join me there, it could be a way for us to best understand each others points of view.

[mikerancourt]

I'm planning to bring a proposal to the WG today (meeting at 4:30) incorporating what folks have discussed here. Come join the conversation.

[mikerancourt]

See the attached document for the initial proposal of a guide to making effective proposals. The idea is to hand this out to working groups and individuals to refer to as they're composing their proposals so that they have a better chance of dealing getting them passed (or at least zeroing in on what will cause resistance and prolong discussion).
We're planning to meet tomorrow (Tuesday) at 4:30 to discuss it (Rose wants to meet at 4PM, but I don't know if she will be able to text everybody to arrange that - I'm good for either time). Please bring suggestions to that meeting or try to get them up on the board with plenty of time for us to see them and consider them.
I said at the WG meeting that a good goal for distribution of the final product is Thursday or so. Just a goal.

Attachments:

[benbrucato]

All proposals that are passed should be posted on the general board or another designated location, so that we can all see them.

[Emma]

glad to see this happening! Thanks mike!
You kinda lost me on that last item, though. Lost in the sense of me not understanding what you were trying to say/get at. Clarification?

I think it's a very good idea to meet at 4 tomorrow. There's so much going on right now.
Has Rose been texting out announcements of the meetings?
I am concerned that they haven't been emailed or posted here, and I think that should be happening as well even if they are also being texted.

[rebecca]

Mike asked me to help edit this and move it forward. Sorry it has taken this long. I will be bringing this revised draft to WG this afternoon:
docs.google.com/document/d/1hPKXf7PbXnUx_SzxpSCjPp2KDjyWEs6ApnJS5jdIIKg/edit

[mikerancourt]

The Facilitation WG agreed on a proposal guideline tonight. The final formatted version (I ended up formatting it, though I didn't do much and I'm not the most aesthetically-0minded person) is attached. Collin will print them as soon as tomorrow.
Collin, if you see this, please confirm that you have received it and can print tomorrow. Also, if you know how to contact Collin, please consider doing so to make sure he gets this.
Mike

Attachments: