| | 6 | == Synthesis of the notes == |
| | 7 | |
| | 8 | (Elaborated by Josue) |
| | 9 | |
| | 10 | NY Group Suggested Edits |
| | 11 | |
| | 12 | === Political Environment document === |
| | 13 | |
| | 14 | We had a lengthy discussion about our political goals behind this document, stemming from questions related to the phrase “original, progressive purpose.” Given current rising awareness about the role of the military and capitalist interests in the internet's development, including how internet communications can be used for control, should we assert this without some backup? Alfredo offered a clarification of the political importance of asserting that the people's labor is the central driving force of the development of the internet. We agreed that defining the progressive purpose of the internet must mean understanding threats to this purpose as well. The paper needs to reference the arc of the history: the military's role in the creation of the technology, grassroots people-to-people development of the internet as a functioning human system (as articulated in the Organic Internet document), and the private sector's role in capitalizing on this people-led development. The part that we focus on is the people-to-people development, though we need to provide basic documentation of the other two stages to make the document more effective as an organizing tool. We also need to add the very, very early examples. |
| | 15 | |
| | 16 | Specific suggestions to achieve the above: |
| | 17 | * clarify references to technology – especially in the paragraph that begins “technology is the driving force” and the subsequent paragraph |
| | 18 | * the term “original, progressive purpose” seems too broad and needs clarification vis a vis the above summary |
| | 19 | * Paragraph near end that starts "At the same time,..." should be emphasized more to achieve above goal. |
| | 20 | * "Theft of resources" needs documentation, and also needs to be plural. |
| | 21 | |
| | 22 | Needs a thorough going over to tighten up, reduce redundancy, etc. There are two paragraphs making the same points such as the crisis one and the "Technology is the driving force..." one. |
| | 23 | |
| | 24 | === Mission document === |
| | 25 | |
| | 26 | * We discussed the question of whether the mission should refer to either our membership structure or our cooperative hosting / tech labor structure. Although there were different opinions in our group, we agreed its ok without references to these constituencies/structures, since that is addressed in the structure document. |
| | 27 | |
| | 28 | * We agreed that the word "participates" should instead be the word "engages". |
| | 29 | |
| | 30 | === Values document === |
| | 31 | |
| | 32 | * Last item needs to have the first "to" removed. |
| | 33 | |
| | 34 | * We identified a missing item about the value of conflict resolution. Proposed language that needs wordsmithing: "Humility, openness to criticism and commitment to conflict resolution create a culture of resilience for our organisation and movements." |
| | 35 | |
| | 36 | === Goals document === |
| | 37 | |
| | 38 | * It seems like kind of a laundry list and a little hard to follow. To address this, we propose a reordering of the list, based on categories. Proposed categories: Organizational related, tech politics related and politics related. |
| | 39 | |
| | 40 | * #6 can be interpreted in many different ways. Needs some focus but probably the "engage members" part is the crux of the goal. So it puts this one in the first and we should avoid the overlap of #6 and #2. |
| | 41 | We also had a suggestion to change "advocacy" to "movement building". |
| | 42 | |
| | 43 | === Structure document === |
| | 44 | |
| | 45 | * We found the centers section a little confusing and spent some time discussing it. Agreed that more attention to this in general would be beneficial. |
| | 46 | |
| | 47 | * We suggest incorporating clear references to control of budget at each level – membership's role, center's role, leadership committee's role. |
| | 48 | |
| | 49 | * We deliberated about the sections concerning representation. We are unclear if the numbers outlined in the second bulletpoint under center will actually work if we add more centers. We did not come to a specific recommendation on this. |
| | 50 | |
| | 51 | * One suggestion to highlight: We need to evaluate our merge with LaNeta to learn from that and prepare for more mergers with other organizations. |
| | 52 | |
| | 53 | * The lack of reference to the support team – ie. the tech workers – was noted, but no recommendation was made based on this. |
| | 54 | |
| | 55 | === Intentionality Statement === |
| | 56 | we never got to this one. |
| | 57 | |
| | 58 | |
| | 59 | |
| | 60 | == Notes == |
| | 61 | |
| | 62 | === Introduction === |
| | 63 | |
