I ve read on twitter about a proposal that proposals be posted with 24 hour notice. Whew. A process argument. More notice has its benefits but 24 hours is not the sweet spot for occupyOakland.
We are seeing too many proposals that would benefit from editting, or would benifit from community input before they are submtted to the GA. Requiring that proposals be fixed 30 hours ahead (24 +6) means even less peer and editting review will happen. Instead of that artificial deadline lets think about what is the purpose of notice.
If the presenter groups submit possible proposals here for community review some 30 or more hours ahead, they would benefit from a temperure check and crowd editting source
30 hour ahead submission required by 24 hour posted notice would also create problem for time sensitive actions, and between the Sunday and Monday GA when a proposal passage changes the outlook
I hope this gets some feedback.
Well, it would be one way to get the 1000-count you mentioned.
Good points.
One of the gripes I had with the voting process is that it was difficult for people outside of the camp to participate. I think the 1000 count happened only once or twice, and this was right after the police acted unprofessionally, to put it neatly.
However, I don’t think that the movement as a whole lacks popular support just because people don’t/can’t show up to the GAs. If you take away the camps, you still have a lot of people upset about corporate money in politics and the growing inequality between rich and poor, among other things.
Did you want it to be easy, convenient and painless? Would you like fries with your entitlement package?
Most of that junk you don’t need to vote on — it’s just a way for proposal makers to feel important.
If you look around and decide you need a head count to legitimize your quorum, the the answer is NO, there are not enough heads.
Once you start compromising, you’ve sold out. With less than 1000, you have no ethical foundation for a vote, and no moral buy-in from the non-voters.
Having less than 1000 and looking around to see your lack of numbers should tell you that, rather than adjusting quorum (like the Federal ceilng) to suit your circumstances, your movement lacks popular support and that you should do something other than vote. I know it sucks but that’s the truth.
I think it should vary based on the type of action. 100 would suffice for internal camp actions. If we’re talking about actions that affect the rest of the Oakland community, 500 would suffice. Now, big things like a general strike or shutting down the ports should require 1000.
When’s the last time 1000 people attended a GA?
1000 or bust.
Also that Sunday meeting would be hella long.
What I have been asking for is a list of proposal topics to be posted on the main website (if not other places) at least 24 hours in advance of a meeting. People can’t always show up, but if something directly effects them, they will make the time. As for the ratification process, I was wondering, does that mean that proposals that pass on Monday, Wednesday and Friday do not have binding authority unless they are ratified on Sunday? Some people work on Sunday (me) and would not like to see their vote thrown away. How about less GAs. 2 or 3 would do. And earlier GA on Sunday would probably serve more people.
I agree – Weekend Daytime assemblies and larger quorum. It is weird that we have assemblies at night even on Sunday. If it was during the day on the weekend many different people from different walks of life would be able to attend and that should be the goal. Otherwise it’s just exclusionary. Lots of folks mentioned this when we discussed ” how to make the GA more relevant” at the last GA. Do you know of anyone working on proposals to do that?
I also agree that 100 is far too small for quorum. Don’t know what the right number is; at least 200 though.
What about having larger weekend assemblies to ratify proposals passed during the week?
Ratification could skip most of the proposal process, and require only a simple majority vote. Any proposal failing to get 50% approval could then be re-opened for additional pros & cons, amendments, etc.
You will never regain community support until you set quorum at 1000. Right now, with less than 200 people voting on actions to be endorsed or undertaken by the mob (such as 19th & Telegraph), you make more enemies than friends. The safe move is to delegitimize yourselves until you can demonstrate solid and CONSISTENT support.