Organizing the 2022 Annual General Meeting

Well done, @Sam_Martyn @simonfreund – appreciate your initiative on this.

There are two primary emails which will need to go out.

The first is the announcement/invitation to the AGM. You can use as a template what I posted. This email needs to go out to members two weeks ahead of the AGM, so that means sent by 8am central on Thurs the 15th is the deadline. I suggest sending it on Wednesday. It must include in writing every rulebook amendment which is being proposed for voting at the upcoming AGM. It does not need to include the text of non-amendment resolutions.

Later, a follow up email offering an agenda can be sent.

3 Likes

Maybe this is too far of a strech given everything that’s going on – but I feel it’s the right thing to do, so I’ll try anyway… : )

Regarding the Zoom link I would love to use meet.coop instead of Zoom as I believe that it’s important to support each other as coops as we are allies working towards the same goal.

I have already been in touch about our next AGM. Here is what Wouter from meet.coop replied to my request:

If I’m not mistaken, Resonate is still a contributing member of meet.coop. I remember the great AGM participatory design that your man Hakanto made (see here his summary on our forum) In any case we’d be glad if you’d use meet.coop for the AGM. Some caveats though: in our cooperative servers you can have up to 100 people in the room.

And if you are indeed that many, it’s generally wise to agree on some norms for participation:

  • only one or a few people activate their webcam (you could even restrict the activation of webcams and limit this to only moderators)

  • agree on norms for speaking up, and use the chat or raise hand feature

  • use the whiteboard area to present plans, slides, etc, and avoid screensharing (the latter is more intensive)

I’d suggest to ask people to confirm before whether or not they’re participating, that’s useful to get an indication of how many people you can expect. Obviously your meeting will be very different on either end of the extremes in your range.

Another option we have is to rent a dedicated BigBlueButton server. We have two options published on our site. Then again, that requires some setup time and costs we cannot waive.

If the cooperative servers we have are useful for you, please let us know when the AGM will take place so we can note it in our production agenda.

Do you think the cooperative server with 100 people will be enough for our AGM and if so, can I go ahead and organise a link to the meeting with Wouter or do you @Hakanto still have a login that you can share with me?

5 Likes

Thanks for looking into this, @simonfreund!

If Wouter feels we can handle up to 100 people, I’d love to use meet.coop. That sounds worth trying to me as long as we have a backup plan. We could use the Assembly Fields I designed as well – they are a wonderful way for folks to express their opinion and engage during a call without having to wait in line to speak.

@peter I’m unable to log into Resonate’s meet.coop account with the credentials I have. Can you let me know if you can log in?

If we can’t get access, we could use my meet.coop account I have through social.coop.

1 Like

Ok, great – I’ll let Wouter know. Backup plan should be Zoom, I guess?

I asked Wouter if they can help us to login – if I get a reply, I’ll let you know ; )

4 Likes

Here is the reply from Wouter regarding the login @Hakanto & @peter

Maybe, you entered peter@resonate.coop instead of peter@resonate .is out of habit?

about your login to our BBB servers: since last July we are using Single Sign On; the resonate account is on Peter’s email: peter@resonate.is as I can see in the system. He has verified the account so he/you should be able to login. If necessary you can reset the password, and change the email address once logged in. Here’s the FAQ: FAQ – meet.coop Single Sign On (SSO) - faq - membership & access - The meet.coop Forum

3 Likes

Hey @simonfreund I’m now able to log in. I’ll message you to sync up about credentials

3 Likes

The Zoom account under my name expired a couple of days ago.

I would need a few dollars (<20) to renew it. I’m waiting on a check and don’t have the funds myself.

I suggest being very clear about the process for this work today.
Where is the draft coming together? When exactly will it close? Who will send it?

Rather than launching tonight, I would suggest working toward a final draft to send at perhaps 2022-12-15T12:00:00Z.

Perhaps the cutoff for resolutions could be about 2022-12-15T05:00:00Z?

(Gives anyone who might have been thinking of items a bit of time to settle their texts.)

Considering this task is being done by a group of volunteers who are scrambling to fill the gaps left by those on the board who’s specific task it is to organize this meeting, I hope that this is coming alongside an offer to help actually get the work done, rather than the backseat commentary I see all too frequently present here from those in official leadership roles at the co-op.

I’ve seen work on the draft coming together in the Communications Pathway channel of Mattermost, the official (as voted on by the Board) chat program used by members to get work done. This is also the way we’ve organized sending out previous e-mails, including the announcement for the last GM. It is being done by @Hakanto @Sam_Martyn and @simonfreund . They’ve also been coordinating with @brndnkng and @peter about getting access to all the right accounts.

Cut off, by the rules, should be 2022-12-15T14:00:00Z, 14 days before the AGM. An announcement needs to be sent out before then too.

Since the work started for the AGM planning on November 15th, and a date has been picked since Nov 28th, I hope people have been working on whatever resolutions they’ve thought of putting in, and that they’re past the drafting stage at this point, honestly. (the AGM was initially going to happen on the 17th!)

2 Likes

This is helpful, thanks.

There was no mention of that in this public space, therefore my questions.

I see resolutions that have dropped in the designated category in the last few hours.

@richjensen, all I see from you is last minute suggestions on how others should do the work you abandoned.

You could have helped with this work, or given guidance earlier. You could have done the work. But now it is the final day. Folks have already figured out how to get this done in the way they feel is both responsible to the co-op and works well for their schedule. The work has been happening transparently both in the forum and on Mattermost.

By the current rules, we are only expecting amendments to be raised by directors. If only those 9 people could be submitting amendments to the rulebook, and you are the Chairperson, and there have been no board meetings in months, and you haven’t communicated at all with directors about submitting amendments at a reasonable time, then who’s fault of coordination is that? The volunteers including myself who have stepped up to make sure we even have an AGM?

I’m not going to ask @Sam_Martyn who is holding down this work to doublecheck the forum tomorrow at 6am for a last second rulebook amendment, quickly revise an email, and then have it sent out by 8am.

The cutoff for posting resolutions in the forum for the AGM is tomorrow 8am US central, as @psi said. The cutoff for raising amendments should be this evening, so that we don’t force volunteers who are doing the work the board has neglected to scramble at the last second.

7 Likes

Perhaps we have different ideas about how work is done, how we value it and how we show that we value the people who contribute it.

I follow the Forum because it is an accessible space.

Some aspects of the work have been offered here previously.

Because today is essentially the day that work must be completed I asked some basic questions about the work, continuing from the threads above, essentially to benefit people who use the Forum for their point of contact with the Coop (myself among them).

@LLK posted a resolution here 4 hours ago. Perhaps others have as well.

How many hours are left?

(Don’t answer, that was rhetorical. Thank you for the informative replies offered above.)

Your comments reflect a heavy interpretative history of our time cooperating together. The thing about interpretations is that there may be different versions.

If I’m here, I’m here to help, here to work, here to cooperate.

This will be my fourth AGM. It is not ideal but this is how they have all come together in my experience. I think this is a mainly a consequence of not having resources for administrative support in the coop.

For what it is worth, the @directors’ obligations under the rules are to “Call” the meeting.

I will encourage the Board members to confirm that this statutory requirement is met.

The above isn’t my “interpretation”. The board essentially abandoned all responsibility for organizing the AGM and I and others have stepped up to get it done after being put in this bad position. I’m not hearing any apologies from you – and I’m not hearing any thanks to the volunteers like @psi who put together the member list and @Sam_Martyn who has been organizing communications.

@richjensen, if you were going to help we needed you a long time ago, not today. You could have taken initiative to make this all a smooth process months ago. You’re too late, man.

1 Like

Rich, frankly, every interaction from you in the past few weeks on this forum has felt like back seat critique, delivered in bad faith. Maybe that is not your intention, but you need to reflect on how you are engaging in this space, and how you are presenting yourself to others. Too many times I have seen tasks you were meant to do land on other people who have to do it last minute. Then when people bring this up, you bring up your term “alternative readings” which more often than not feels like gaslighting.

Cooperating requires basic accountability. I don’t know why you have difficulty being accountable, but if we are to depend on you for work getting done, we need to know that we can depend on you. I, honestly, can’t.

@LLK posted a resolution here 4 hours ago. Perhaps others have as well.

LLK didn’t write that resolution 4 hours ago, it’s been in the works for a couple of days, maybe even a week. And more importantly, it was delivered before the deadline, which has been public for a while (it’s in the first post). (I learned my lesson around this when the last General Meeting was announced almost exactly 14 days before the General Meeting, giving absolutely no time to add resolutions to be discussed by those not on the board). This sounds like “accountability for you, but not for me”.

This will be my fourth AGM. It is not ideal but this is how they have all come together in my experience.

This is exactly the point. If this happens every year why is there no reflection on why that’s happening? Why is there absolutely no action on preventing this from happening?

For what it is worth, the @directors’ obligations under the rules are to “Call” the meeting.

You didn’t even do that! @melis_tailored above suggested skipping that step after I brought up the fact that no organizing around this was being done. I agree with the suggestion, but the board failed in its one official duty to the AGM.

3 Likes

Another view might be that the Board didn’t get in the way of Members’ initiative.

speechless :frowning:

2 Likes

I accept that you feel that way but I’ve been here consistently building for four years in good faith.

I followed the AGM organizing process you invoked in this space, including attending and gathering notes at last week’s Conversational Assemblies, in good faith.

I came here today (skipping work at the factory) looking for the state of the AGM organizing in good faith.

I tried to share resources with the Dev team three weeks ago at the DSP Sync meeting in good faith.

When others focus on other priorities and procedures, I argue in good faith that a DSP roadmap and resources for compliance, executive function and administrative capacity are crucial.

As someone who hopes for the success of this project far beyond my persynal interest, when I point out how transformative your contribution was @psi in opening the maintainer circle, I do so in good faith.

When I argue that the Manifesto and critical positions on race, class and gender are necessary for establishing the social and historical context for the coop and that this is crucial for navigating its long-term sustainability and autonomy, I’m coming in good faith.

When I insist we work in ways that are accessible, welcoming and respectful to folks that relate to time, being and sociality in diverse and pluralistic ways, that is coming in good faith.

This is fair.

Also fair. We make our own determinations about each other.

Being present here now. Speaking from my truth in good faith is a part of my accountability, and also, I would argue, my value to my comrades. (Even if they disagree. lol.)

Perhaps submitting to the will of my comrades is how I can show accountability?

I am open.

“Another view might be that the Board didn’t get in the way of Members’ initiative.”

Initiative is about proactive action. What people want to do that can make our future better.

Instead we are in a pattern of reactive action. Work is being required of people who are trying to avoid a worse future they anticipate would happen if they didn’t act. My work on the AGM is a reaction. I don’t want it, but am doing it. It sucks.

Your lack of proactive action has made made it significantly more difficult for co-op members to take their own proactive actions. All they are left with is reacting, as @psi said happened to him at the last General Meeting. Reacting is what they suffer from everywhere: their job, their life in Capitalism. We are inviting them to this co-op to leave those conditions and be free.

When some have the power to create conditions and others only have the power to react to those conditions, this is a power dynamic. @richjensen as Chairperson and informally, you have this power. How are you using it?

Rather than using that power to create better conditions, what I’ve experienced is that you use it to micromanage people who are doing their best to react to negative conditions, often conditions you created. This isn’t good for me, for you, for anyone. It doesn’t feel empowering. It is miserable. And I can’t imagine anyone spectating this discussion thinks “Wow, Resonate! I want what they have.”

These conditions I find myself in are not freedom.

3 Likes

Respectfully, I do not accept this as an accurate representation of our relation to the work we share here.

We both create and react to the conditions we present. We both suffer and we are both responsible for navigating our suffering. This is the case for everyone in this space.

The power relations that count most in this space are those from outside. Those with surplus time or social advantages or expertise should feel responsibility for supporting more marginalized and precarious members in their development of these capacities.

I have felt that our collective fluency and creativity around these dynamics has been lacking. Again, the Manifesto was a start in recognizing the context for this work.

Democracy without context in global solidarity is not progressive.

Asking basic questions is not micro-management.

I accept that the irritated reaction I often get has to do with how people feel about me or their relation to positions I represent to them and not the quality of my questions.

Silos of expertise is a serious problem in society and here in this coop. I have argued that it will never be resolved, only mitigated against and respected.

Coding, coop governance, and distributing music commercially are technical domains that have their distinct social patterns.

Likewise, making a life out of radical music, facilitating its distribution and actively listening to it are distinct relations to the form.

Our co-op must account for these divergent relations.

Asking and answering simple questions is probably the best medicine for this.