Straw Poll for whether to use people’s mic vs amplified sound at the beginning of GA
In order to facilitate more direct involvement of those present at general assembly and to avoid what may sometimes develop into abuse of power through amplification, we request that at the beginning of each meeting of the general assembly, the occupants present do a straw poll as to whether to use amplified sound, megaphone and/or human microphone. We request that anyone using a microphone or megaphone at any meeting or event, and especially during marches, be either willing to share that device with anyone wishing to use it for mic check, or refrain from using it themselves. That said, we request that those willing to use such devices honor agreed upon processes and common courtesy. During a meeting, performance, etc, it would not be reasonable for a person to request use of a device unless they have information to pass which constitutes an emergency.
Maybe the committee can agree on a person who will be in front of/next to each speaker as they are speaking. They will signal when the speaker is getting off topic. The rules can be discussed beforehand. Anyone can go off topic, whether it is just meandering or total nonsense. So this MC or facilitator, will use a harmless approach. I’ve seen “bunny ears” used causing a great amount of humor. If the speaker goes off topic, the “bunny ears” start to appear The bunny ears are the facilitator’s two fingers on each hand, rising up on the sides of the facilitator’s head if the speaker goes too long or goes off topic. Just an idea I have seen work. There has to be trust with the chosen facilitator, no matter what method they have to signal to the speaker. I like the idea of keeping the people’s mic.
The human mic is NLP mind control. Occupy wouldn’t work so well without it .because people wouldn’t be forced to repeat the subversive platitudes (which, I admit, are annoying, as CG suggests).
Having experienced both I see pros and cons for each. The human mike is kind of awesome to experience in person. However when the subject being human miked is just blathering without focus it is VERY annoying. But it also democratizes voices because we all sound the same through the human mic. Though I worry if some people can ingest and comprehend what they are mindlessly repeating. I have trouble with this myself sometimes.
Amplified GA proceeedings can be annoying too. Esp when it sounds bad and there is feedback, or when somebody very loud follows a quiet speaker. But it seems like amplified proceedings run faster, so long as it continues to move forward. 😛
i agree with all of this, BUT….isn’t it at the facilitation committee’s discretion to use any techniques that will help the process along?
it seems like it would be easier to just pitch it to the group during the meeting and have them agree to do it, rather than passing it through GA.
also…it would feel like micromanaging their group process.
i’m pretty sure it will pass but i question the need for the proposal.