Carboniferous era sea cucumber

To: no-list@yahoogroups.com

From: Dennis Budd <nitewing@ku.edu>

Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 21:53:48 -0500

Subject: [no-list] Re: inclusion/process & NO

On Sun, 1 Jun 2003, Www wrote:

the thing that I'm not clear on, is what has happened already in this process that has led us to a point where it seems like nothing is happening. if the history is documented in list archives I need to go and read them, and may not be able to do that until later this summer when I can give it my attention.

Www, I think it would be worth your while to read the archives when you have the time to give it your attention. You will not find a whole lot of N.O. Organizing mechanics but you will find a lot of discussion of the kind that is going on now, but from different people with different perspectives.

Yahoo! will eventually start deleting the oldest messages in the archive when we reach our alloted disk quota. I don't think that's started to happen yet; I think all the messages are still there.

I don't think nothing is happening. I am a survivor (the word "victim" comes to mind first) of previous national organizing efforts, and I think the process of trying to come to some kind of grassroots "consciousness" of what a national organization should be about and how it should function has to come first. We will not come to a grassroots consciousness here on this list, but we have to start somewhere, and what is happening here now, and what was happening here last fall, is a start.

the other thing however is that I don't think there's anything to stop people who have a particular agenda such as that outlined by jim & added to by me & sue, from creating an organization based on that agenda. people would join based on their agreement and wish to participate in it. & that is not something that can be done overnight either.

Actually (my personal opinion, I'm not speaking as listowner) I don't think that's such a bad idea. But that's a lot of work too. My concern would be how much energy would it take away from the work to build a unified N.O. that we are trying to do here? Dunno. But, having helped initiate this N.O process, I, at least, care about that.

so I'm not rejecting the idea of the NO as envisioned by the documents, just not clear where

I or anyone else on this list fits into the process, or can fit into it.

I'm not sure that things are "formed" enough for it to be clear, Www. Stick around. Hopefully things will "gel" further.

Dennis

<snip>

To: no-list@yahoogroups.com

From: Dennis Budd <nitewing@ku.edu>

Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 22:15:31 -0500 (CDT)

Subject: Re: [no-list] inclusion/process & NO

On Sun, 1 Jun 2003 starfish@northcoast.com wrote:

Yes, in fact the NO-LIST is not the NO, and it surely isn't "the movement." What is at issue is the vehicle of producing such an organization. Should the NO-LIST be a vehicle for creating new organizations? And I think the answer is unequivocally, "No." We did not agree to any such purpose, in joining or forming the NO-LIST. This is a question of ethics, ultimately a question of respect. I earnestly hope you recognize the concern in that area.

Actually, Andrew, this list came within a whisker of being the vehicle to launch a National Desk in Washington, DC. The rush to create the National Desk fell apart (fortunately, in my opinion) but it is basically on hold, not deep-sixed. I expect that the National Desk will still be created before the underlying National Organization itself is, and that this list will be the vehicle for creating it. If this expectation turns out to be what happens, my first major concern is still that the National Desk be subordinate to whatever grassroots N.O. may arise out of this process. And my second major concern is that it be an outgrowth of something grassroots, and not just another self-justifying Washington organization. We have enough of those around. The reason I was relieved when the National Desk effort got put on hold is that I don't see "grassroots" efforts, grassroots consciousness developed enough for it to function in anything more than a vacuum. But a voice in Washington is still necessary, still urgent. It still needs to happen sometime in, say, the next twelve months. It won't necessarily wait as long as it takes for "grassroots" organizing to gel.

I basically agree with you that the NO-LIST should not be the vehicle that creates the national organization itself (which we are still a long way from), but the process here is not as "clean" as what you are implying.

Dennis

As a list moderator, I will say that that is a concern I take seriously.