The PsySR OpCom has transmitted by way of Jancis Long that our PsySR project on "networking and engagement" for "new social roles" is 'by and large' approved. [Proposal as submitted]

1.   Appoint a co-leader. For that, the originary persons putting this proposal together were myself, Lynne Stewart, and Frank Kashner. I have connected with them, and they are both willing to be identified with this project in this way. So, two "co-leaders."
2.   That (those) person(s) accept the wording of the project as it is. That was done prior to its submission, in both instances.
3.   I and co-leader(s) agree to a 2-3 paragraph description of the project to put on the PsySR website. That will be done, no problem, but it's concern #4 that calls attention just now.
4.   The project will last no longer than two (2) years, and 3-month updates be provided. The 3-month updates is fine. It's the time frame which I/we think needs addressing.
   
   This project is meant to be a coalition between PsySR and the Social Accountability Work Group. Here is the point of "coalition negotiation" on behalf of social accountability. To put before us a "performance standard" with the subtext that we are seeking "new social roles" is an accommodation, not a satisfactory arrangement. The client/survivors do not need an "open-ended" arrangement, but we do need as advocates for an oppressed group to take social responsibility for our own timing. The outcome has to come from our sense of empowerment, not derive from such accommodation. To make a meaningful, mutually respectful coalition, we will need a different framing of the "timing." Our work process must nurture folks with "timing deficits" due to 'gaslighting' expectations and thus embrace the handling of the stress of being engaged as "behavioral objects." The completion of the project needs a more 'organic' expectation.
   
   For instance, we could say, "in two years, we will develop a discussion and eventually a framework whereby we will be ready to transition to a new level of activist focus." Instead of nervously acting like the White Rabbit, we need to find our way to "our own sense of engagement." The exact wording, I do not know just now. What I believe is that we can accommodate happily the idea that this project should come to an end in a 'reasonable' time frame, and that we can negotiate that time frame. However we can not abide that the time frame be defined unilaterally by the PsySR leadership. We will need to breathe and to "think this through" even as the Walrus is shucking all the oysters.
   
   Anyway, so it is, I think, that we should respond to this offer. Anybody who sees how to improve on my formulation should speak up. [!]
5.   Everyone participating in the project becomes a member of PsySR. I'm OK with that. PsySR has "low income" membership and an accommodation so that nobody is to be excluded from membership for lack of funds.