If you are interested in joining our mailing list, please submit your email below.
Information concerning the Occupy Portland General Assembly(GA) is being diligently worked on. Please keep checking back as it evolves.
Occupy Portland General Assembly Resources:
General Assembly Notes
Occupy Portland Open Consensus Philosophy
How to Bring a Proposal to the General Assembly
Structure of Facilitating Proposals
Please engage in our discussion forums.
(Editor’s note: This page used to contain the GA Notes from 10/08/2011. These have been moved to the General Assembly Notes page. Thank you)
I just wanted to say good luck!!!! I am not able to be there in person but I am there in spirit. Keep up the good work, don’t give up even when you are exhausted, cold, wet or just plain done.
Remember all the wonderful people before you who took a stand, and it made a difference: Martin Luther King,the countless men and women who marched to end the vietnam war, the list could go on and on.
If you believe in what you are doing, then you can’t be wrong. We need to be able to have a future for our children, for our future children and for us. It is the land of oppertunity, let’s help America live up to that phrase.
God Bless
Tina
[probably there is a better place for this. can someone move it there?]
Open Consensus: a framework for building consensus in an open assembly
======================================================================
[This proposal results from a series of Occupy Portland General Assembly discussions, referred to open meetings for further development. Most recently, this proposal was consensed by 80%+ of the 10/8 7pm General Assembly. Further refinements were suggested, which will be discussed and integrated on Monday 10/10 at 10am. Discuss beforehand and send proxies if you can't come yourself!]
OPEN CONSENSUS PROPOSAL
———————–
* After discussion of a proposal, facilitators will ask to “see the consensus of the assembly”, by asking who agrees, who disagrees, and who stands aside. These proportions will always be recognized and recorded, as the basis for further development of the proposal, and/or autonomous action by those that agree.
* If there is very strong support for a proposal, the facilitators may ask to see if there are any remaining blocking concerns. If there are not, this can be considered a “full consensus of the assembly”. This has the greatest legitimacy for action on behalf of the whole.
* When appropriate, a consensus of 90% or more of the assembly, regardless of blocks, can be considered an “agreement of the assembly”. Depending on the proportion, this has relatively less legitimacy as “speaking for the whole” and should be used cautiously with understanding that there are unresolved major concerns.
Background
———-
We are an open assembly, designed to welcome the 99% — with new people always arriving, people with profoundly different perspectives, experiences, needs, values, ideas. This diversity is valuable, a source of wealth.
A core purpose for the assembly is for us to hear each other, to discover who agrees on what, and who disagrees. Those that agree can find each other and take action together. Those that disagree can find each other, discuss and debate, and create new solutions that take more perspectives into account, building broader consensus.
Most consensus tools are designed for groups with consistent, well-trained participation rooted in a well-defined common purpose. Such consensus practices build trust and understanding over time, weaving people together. In this context, blocks and stand asides and other tools are gifts that support the process by ensuring that “minority” concerns are heard, understood, and addressed.
In an open assembly, however, mechanically using these same tools can distort and mask the real complexity and diversity of the assembly, for example by amplifying those with confident or contrarian voices far more than everyone else.
This “open consensus” proposal is an attempt to adapt consensus tools to better achieve the core goals.
How to Use Open Consensus
————————-
There are very different kinds of proposals that come to the assembly: how urgent is it? how much does it affect everyone? how logistical is it? how political is it? etc. Depending on such differences, different outcomes can be sought.
* Often, the most valuable outcome of bringing a proposal to an assembly is to discover who consenses to it, so that groups and individuals can act autonomously with that information in mind.
* Often, the most valuable outcome is to discover who has strong concerns with a proposal, and what they are, so that more work can be done to create a more comprehensive solution.
* Sometimes, however, it’s important for the assembly to know that a proposal can be understood to “speak for the whole”. This confers a particular legitimacy.
Which outcome is needed for which proposals is something we hope to explore together in practice. “Open consensus” is an attempt to formalize a process that can support all the outcomes above, as needed.
Potential Examples
——————
* Rodrigo proposes a resolution to demand that bankers have a salary cap. 60% of the assembly consenses to it. Rodrigo sets a meeting time to get together with those that agree to distribute flyers, write congresspeople, etc. (Such literature may indicate that 60% of an assembly of Occupy Portland consensed to the demand.)
* Desiree proposes an action to occupy Umpqua Bank offices to stop clearcutting. 40% of the assembly consenses to it, but 50% of the assembly consenses to an action to occupy Wells Fargo to stop Arizona anti-immigrant policing. Both groups set up times to meet and plan, while also setting up a meeting of those with particularly strong feelings one way or the other to see if a combined or linked action is possible, to be brought back as a revised proposal.
* Allison proposes that alcohol not be consumed in the encampment; 80% of the assembly consenses. It’s referred to the safety, kids, sexual assault, and other logistics committees for further action, with understanding of the weight of support for the idea. At the same time, those with the greatest ideological and logistical concerns with the proposal meet with a group of those supporting it to try and address the concerns.
* Thami proposes the open consensus framework as a process of decision-making. 80% of the assembly consenses. Groups discuss further, refine the proposal, and at the next GA 90% consense. While this can when necessary be acted on as an “agreement of the assembly”, there remain some important concerns. Several groups continue to work on addressing those and refining the proposal. Deep discussion ensues, combined with growing experience with the process. New people constantly enter, being trained in the evolving process (including the concerns outstanding). Eventually in two weeks, full consensus (of the 700 at general assembly) is reached except for three people: a person that has blocked any ideas other than absolute consensus, accusing those who try to meet and talk of being infiltrators; and two new participants arriving for the first time who think any form of consensus is hopeless. This is considered a strong agreement of the assembly — though not a full consensus. Everyone involved is proud of their work, has learned a lot, understands the process much better, and has stronger relationships with each other.
Open Consensus: a framework for building consensus in an open assembly
======================================================================
[This proposal results from a series of Occupy Portland General Assembly discussions, referred to open meetings for further development. Most recently, this proposal was consensed by 80%+ of the 10/8 7pm General Assembly. Further refinements were suggested, which will be discussed and integrated on Monday 10/10 at 10am. Discuss beforehand and send proxies if you can't come yourself!]
OPEN CONSENSUS PROPOSAL
———————–
* After discussion of a proposal, facilitators will ask to “see the consensus of the assembly”, by asking who agrees, who disagrees, and who stands aside. These proportions will always be recognized and recorded, as the basis for further development of the proposal, and/or autonomous action by those that agree.
* If there is very strong support for a proposal, the facilitators may ask to see if there are any remaining blocking concerns. If there are not, this can be considered a “full consensus of the assembly”. This has the greatest legitimacy for action on behalf of the whole.
* When appropriate, a consensus of 90% or more of the assembly, regardless of blocks, can be considered an “agreement of the assembly”. Depending on the proportion, this has relatively less legitimacy as “speaking for the whole” and should be used cautiously with understanding that there are unresolved major concerns.
Background
———-
We are an open assembly, designed to welcome the 99% — with new people always arriving, people with profoundly different perspectives, experiences, needs, values, ideas. This diversity is valuable, a source of wealth.
A core purpose for the assembly is for us to hear each other, to discover who agrees on what, and who disagrees. Those that agree can find each other and take action together. Those that disagree can find each other, discuss and debate, and create new solutions that take more perspectives into account, building broader consensus.
Most consensus tools are designed for groups with consistent, well-trained participation rooted in a well-defined common purpose. Such consensus practices build trust and understanding over time, weaving people together. In this context, blocks and stand asides and other tools are gifts that support the process by ensuring that “minority” concerns are heard, understood, and addressed.
In an open assembly, however, mechanically using these same tools can distort and mask the real complexity and diversity of the assembly, for example by amplifying those with confident or contrarian voices far more than everyone else.
This “open consensus” proposal is an attempt to adapt consensus tools to better achieve the core goals.
How To Use Open Consensus
————————-
There are very different kinds of proposals that come to the assembly: how urgent is it? how much does it affect everyone? how logistical is it? how political is it? etc. Depending on such differences, different outcomes can be sought.
* Often, the most valuable outcome of bringing a proposal to an assembly is to discover who consenses to it, so that groups and individuals can act autonomously with that information in mind.
* Often, the most valuable outcome is to discover who has strong concerns with a proposal, and what they are, so that more work can be done to create a more comprehensive solution.
* Sometimes, however, it’s important for the assembly to know that a proposal can be understood to “speak for the whole”. This confers a particular legitimacy.
Which outcome is needed for which proposals is something we hope to explore together in practice. “Open consensus” is an attempt to formalize a process that can support all the outcomes above, as needed.
Potential Examples
——————
* Rodrigo proposes a resolution to demand that bankers have a salary cap. 60% of the assembly consenses to it. Rodrigo sets a meeting time to get together with those that agree to distribute flyers, write congresspeople, etc. (Such literature may indicate that 60% of an assembly of Occupy Portland consensed to the demand.)
* Desiree proposes an action to occupy Umpqua Bank offices to stop clearcutting. 40% of the assembly consenses to it, but 50% of the assembly consenses to an action to occupy Wells Fargo to stop Arizona anti-immigrant policing. Both groups set up times to meet and plan, while also setting up a meeting of those with particularly strong feelings one way or the other to see if a combined or linked action is possible, to be brought back as a revised proposal.
* Allison proposes that alcohol not be consumed in the encampment; 80% of the assembly consenses. It’s referred to the safety, kids, sexual assault, and other logistics committees for further action, with understanding of the weight of support for the idea. At the same time, those with the greatest ideological and logistical concerns with the proposal meet with a group of those supporting it to try and address the concerns.
* Thami proposes the open consensus framework as a process of decision-making. 80% of the assembly consenses. Groups discuss further, refine the proposal, and at the next GA 90% consense. While this can when necessary be acted on as an “agreement of the assembly”, there remain some important concerns. Several groups continue to work on addressing those and refining the proposal. Deep discussion ensues, combined with growing experience with the process. New people constantly enter, being trained in the evolving process (including the concerns outstanding). Eventually in two weeks, full consensus (of the 700 at general assembly) is reached except for three people: a person that has blocked any ideas other than absolute consensus, accusing those who try to meet and talk of being infiltrators; and two new participants arriving for the first time who think any form of consensus is hopeless. This is considered a strong agreement of the assembly — though not a full consensus. Everyone involved is proud of their work, has learned a lot, understands the process much better, and has stronger relationships with each other.
http://takethesquare.net/2011/07/31/quick-guide-on-group-dynamics-in-peoples-assemblies/
http://nycga.cc/resources/general-assembly-guide/
My one voice likes 9/10 s and hope this is brought up 1st thing at GA to advance decision making process.
Thank you
deb
Where can i find the notes from the 10/8 General Assembly, as well as last night’s General Assembly notes?
Where are the notes from any of the other General Assemblies? Most importantly the last two nights where decisions have actually been made but GAs weren’t live streamed? I left night before last prior to the GA specifically to watch online and it wasn’t streamed and notes have not been posted. I came out last night so I’d be sure to get the info, but had to leave early. The issue of notes being posted online was discussed and I spoke to it from the crowd. Before I left I ensured with one of the facilitators that notes would definitely be posted and spotlighted on the home page rather than hidden among the forums or many sections of this site. They have yet to be posted anywhere I’ve thought to look. This is an important task that should be extremely easy to accomplish. In fact, Ace from Media said something to the effect of “ensuring nothing like that (not having notes posted) ever happened again.” I’ve volunteered to post the notes personally from my house due to one excuse regarding equipment failure and was told that would not be necessary, that they would handle it. It has not been handled and people who cannot attend meetings are completely in the dark. I see no reason why notes from last night would not be online by this morning. Please resolve this issue immediately!!
I, too, would appreciate being able to read notes from the other GA’s, and I want to share appreciation for the amazing work being done on the ground – thank you! The notes help all of us feel and be included even when we can’t be there in person.
Last night I watched the live streaming of the GA. I am appalled at what I saw. In the Army in the late ’60′s I was trained as a Counterintelligence Agent for Military Intelligence. Watching the GA wallow in discussion of process, then actually vote on “granting” street access TO EMERGENCY VEHICLES – WTF!!!
As a Counterintelligence Agent I was taught that the key to controlling dissodent groups was delay. Take over meetings and wrap up the group in procedure produces great delay. Make people vote on issues that common sense tells you are not yours to vote on – that is another. I suggest that those of you trying to facilitate the GA meetings call the facilitators in New York for help. You have great hearts, great energy, and the ability to make great change. But the first change you have to make is the way the GA is hijacked.
GOOD LUCK
Too many old hippie women here. Please send more younger chicks!
Could this page list contact information and meeting times for the facilitation team?