Outcomes:
- Preliminary holding group, 'alpha group' consisting of Frank, Bodhi, Matthias and Doug.
- Basic decision-making framework adopted: rough consensus (no resistance) or syscon (if passed by majority) - something like this.
- Doug to link resources. (here)
free speaking round:
Matthias.
- what are the needs of the peops in wurzen-project.
- wishes, vision, how to grow? peoplewise?
- practical topics, recap of what happend. legal stuff, how do we continue (practial)
Frank:
- agrees to matthias' points, refers to the plan for moving in in the wiki
- wants to talk about needs and visions, why do I want to be in wurzen, what do I like to do there?
- Are there foreseen problems/bad feelings already that we can try to solve?
Rosina:
- is not sure if she wants to be in the wurzen project -> does not want to take part in decision making.
- leaves on friday
Lisa:
- not sure if she wants to live in wurzen but she likes the group and want to be with us.
- she wants to do research on how to start such a project. (community building)
Bodhi.
- excited to start! happy. does not what to have a planless BD happen again. looking forward to have all those meetings about W.
- a bit sad that there is so little people that want to do it -> how do we integrate new people then later?
- community building possible in june
Doug:
- he sees it as an opportunity to start with a small, more coherent group.
topics:
conflict in the common idea of openness
suggestion to go on pair walks to find out what you agree/disagree on with the other person
process suggestion to gather points that need talking in the next weeks:
legal:
- status of Verein (Matthias will find out early afternoon)
- how to handle money to get & sustain the house
- paid labour when staying in the house
- use of money in the house (money-based events in regards to people getting money / money for resources like e.g. wool)
- general understanding / implications of money
- long term legal stability (maximize demarketization) to secure the purpose of the house
social:
- write down a common vision statement based on individual visions
- formalize the group (hierarchy and structure)
- decision making structure
- how to later integrate people / what's the impact on made decisions and the group?
- what does it mean (not) to be part of the group?
- meeting guidelines (regular meetings?)
- handling responsibilities and action points already early in the process
- how to be open for external projects and participation throughout the whole process?
- differentiation building group/living group? Disallowing non-builders in the first months?
- implications from an iterative plan vs a bigger plan right now
- what practical projects do I want to do in the house (individual short term practical vision)?
- how to sustain the social/cultural ideology of the house?
Proposals for first topics: (resistance, enthusiasm)
meeting structures 1 5
personal needs/wants/values/visions 2 4
group formalization 2 6
0: continue vague discussing 6
fs 6
We chose to talk about meeting structures, starting at 2pm, circle room
Meeting structures
start with round about opinions. Outcome: All of us value structured meeting but also freedom. Important to have an outcome but not be fixed in a formal process.
Doug presents way of the anarchists federation. Short version: Consensual decision (all agree), or forced 2/3 majority vote (if majority of people want to come to a decision from a discussion). After a decision making, topic is changed.
Doug presents an extended syscon: Do not only ask for resistance but also support to find out who is actually interested on working on a topic and not only has little resistance.
Short mentioning of P7 decision making process (pirate party) as an example of a system actively looking for acceptance as well
Short discourse into how to become part of the group
- Matthias: Something like people are around us quite often / take responsibilities should trigger the group join process
- Frank: Keep a bit of a balance between professions, gender, interests
Bodhi: Unstructured fine for now, but would like to have agenda normally
Doug: Really likes having agendas beforehand if possible. Basic minutes should exist for every meeting containing proper metadata.
Decision to use the majority call to vote followed by syscon as a general decision making framework (if casual consensus cannot be reached).
Wish to have deeper process later (e.g. how to handle individual high resistances etc.)
Doug will share useful links on the topic of decision making frameworks
- Short discourse on meeting time: Frank expressed the need that 4 hours of meeting a day is enough for him. We agreed that taking part in a meeting is always a choice, minutes should be done.
- Bodhi will be gone friday to tuesday, we will continue in that time anyway. Our timeframe will be driven by needs and topics and not just set to an arbitrary amount of days.
Doug suggests to give the group a (preliminary) name to reflect that this does not only consist of the current members (Bodhi, Doug, Matthias, Frank). This group is now called Alpha Group because it is the first group formed around this project :)
Matthias: Include the definition of residents into this group.
Doug: Yes, this group is centered around the Wurzen housing project.
