NCN Chat 19 Nov 95
How to work with groups. Teamwork, networking, social artistry

<ffunch> Our topic is "How to work with groups. Teamwork, networking, social
+artistry"

<cbwillis> I loved the phrase social artistry

<ffunch> Yes, I lik that too. Picked it up from Jean Houston.

<cbwillis> great where its genuine

<cbwillis> no one likes to be "worked" over by another, no matter with how
+much flair

<ffunch> What I'm stil puzzled about is what really makes groups tick.

<ffunch> It has to be done with rapport and integrity.

<cbwillis> purpose that everyone is enrolled with

<cbwillis> respect for each other, admiration for each other

<ffunch> Do everybody have to agreee with a purpose to start with?

<cbwillis> yes, if only to explore a purpose, unless you're talking about
+informal get togethers, which arguably are not really groups

<ffunch> I agree.

<ffunch> There is also the element of optimum size. Not too big and not too small.

<cbwillis> there is usually some point of commonality

<cbwillis> different size for different purposes

<ffunch> One problem is just that we might interpret the purpose somewhat
+differently.

<cbwillis> a stated purpose helps, with permission for other informal
+purposes, or derivative or related purposes

<ffunch> A team would, I guess, be 2-10 members or so, a community 100-300 or so.

<cbwillis> it's what happens between 10 and 100 that gets dicey

<ffunch> And I think the overall purpose has to be general enough to allow choosing
+different aspects, but specific enough to show that we are working on the
+same thing.

<cbwillis> Yes

<ffunch> Also there is the element of being closely enough connected, having enough
+of an interface to feel we know each other.

<cbwillis> Feel for connection is sometimes the best part.

<ffunch> Yes. Unfortunately sometimes hard to do over e-mail.

<cbwillis> Intimacy, respect, and admiration, just delight in being together

<ffunch> Right. Just being. Not having to argue and prove things.

<cbwillis> There's no time or space at a spirit level.

<ffunch> You're right.

<ffunch> What makes a non-group into a group , then?

<cbwillis> We're at a crossroads now with teams...historically people are now
+becoming more individualistic, have their own ideas and ways of doing
+things...

<cbwillis> yet are being asked to participate in groups collaboratively.

<ffunch> Yes, I think we have to find new ways now of working together, even though
+we're our own selves too.

<cbwillis> This is often not their first choice, as they can do what they want
+to do more easily by themselves, because no disagreements.

<cbwillis> One disagreement or even personality clash starts to tie up energy
+that would otherwise be used more directly on a project.

<ffunch> Somehow the proof must be in the pudding. It must be shown to be an
+advantage, also egoistically speaking.

<cbwillis> It must be seen to be an advantage to the person, not imposed on
+them by others.

<ffunch> But then again, sometimes a disagreement might define better what we're
+doing.

<ffunch> A self-chosen advantage to cooperate with others.

<cbwillis> Yes, but it takes energy, and esp introverts are going to have
+difficulty with this.

<cbwillis> I notice that cooperation is natural in spontaneous emergency
+situations, like if your neighbor is in trouble.

<ffunch> Yes. As to NCN I am quite wary about conflicts. Trying to avoid them, as
+they can be quite damageing, and people start leaving.

<cbwillis> People give up so fast today, judge so quickly, makes me wonder,
+since  I was brought up otherwise.

<ffunch> The question is then if we should simulate a big external threat, or if we
+should just let cooperation develop in a more positive manner.

<ffunch> Guess a lot of people feel insecure in the world, feel they need to protect
+themselves, just fend for themselves.

<ffunch> People have a short attention span.

<cbwillis> I think the point is that what works best is natural and what I
+would call "in the energy" - it's a "but of course" when it's right, no
+decisions from the head involved.

<ffunch> Very true.

<ffunch> We can't really plan and steer it very much without spoiling it.

<ffunch> Its more being in touch with where the energy is going.

<cbwillis> When a project is complex, people are more or less forced to
+cooperate because the *can't* do it alone.
*** haze (~haze@205.160.162.74) has joined channel #ncn

<cbwillis> hi haze

<haze> Good afternnon.

<ffunch> That is a clue. So the more compex the project is the more self-evident it
+is that we need to cooperated.

<haze> Has the NCN chat already began ?

<ffunch> Hi Haze, good to see you!

<ffunch> We've sort of gotten xstarted, but new chatters can start here.

<cbwillis> So if we would be inclined to go alone, but find we must cooperate
+to do complex projects, then we have to overcome resistance to cooperation
+where we would not want to interact otherwise.

<ffunch> We're talking about "How to work with groups. Teamwork, networking, social
+artistry"

<haze> great! i actually made it for once.

<cbwillis> jump in anywhere!

<haze> tough subjects.

<ffunch> Yes, if we really need or want the fruits of a complex project, we need to
+cooperate to get them.

<ffunch> Yes, tough. We don't quite have ready-made solutions.

<cbwillis> Full out communication is essential

<ffunch> A group is kind of something that has to emerge.

<cbwillis> What gets me is people withholding key information that will affect
+me, not just facts but attitudes

<ffunch> The group energy needs to reveal itself.

<ffunch> Pisses me off too.

<haze> I guess from my experience with working in groups;I would have to say
+the biggest problems arise rom different people having clightly different
+goals.

<cbwillis> It needs time to reveal itself, tho it can reveal a preliminary
+energy that may not sustain itself over time.

<ffunch> Yes, if we aren't working in the same direction.

<ffunch> Diversity is both the problem and the strength in a group.

<cbwillis> There is the official agenda, then there are personal agendas
+(personal needs).

<ffunch> And some people will project their personal agenda on the whole group.

<haze> Or perhaps the problems of individuals holding out so that they can
+"come up a brilliant idea one their own and there fore claim all the credit"

<cbwillis> And the group dynamic is changed with even one new person, group
+dyanmic entirely shifts.

<cbwillis> So managing the changing scene takes lots of psychic energy.

<ffunch> YEs, takes quite some work to be in tune with where things are going.

<ffunch> I suppose some people have a hard time even recognizing that a group exists.

<cbwillis> There are compensation programs now where collaboration and
+teamwork and helpfulness to others is factored in.

<ffunch> Some people need to learn that there is a certain give and take.

<ffunch> Egos are a big obstacle.

<cbwillis> Learn to reconcile a natural give and take and reciprocity with
+"integrity issues"

<haze> Sure,but how can that be taught.

<ffunch> Well, somehow it must become apparent that things just work better by
+cooperating on them.

<cbwillis> socratic dialogue on particular case situations

<haze> that is something that would have to be incorporated in schools,to
+young children.

<ffunch> The results will prove that teamwork works and self-centered defensiveness
+works less well.

<cbwillis> dialogue surfaces the issues and concerns, then people can go into
+reconciliation and problem solving mode

<ffunch> There would need to be a way of measuring productivity. Just defending one's
+ideas doesn't count any points.

<cbwillis> the difficulty is where one person boggs the group down, based on a
+strongly held principle

<ffunch> Yes, that's the part I don't quite know how to deal with.

<ffunch> Arguing about it tends to make it worse.

<cbwillis> A person who can defend their ideas is still more valuable than one
+who can't.

<haze> but in our world,a typical measure of success is CASH$$ ,which is often
+in the hands of the back-stabbers,not the team players.

<ffunch> True. And I guess the thing to do is to avoid confrontation about it.

<ffunch> We need to count something else than Cash.

<ffunch> Quality-of-life units.

<cbwillis> avoid confrontation??

<haze> Something like happiness.

<ffunch> I mean, it isn't particularly productive to try to convince the person with
+the strong views to change them.

<cbwillis> you can do a reductio ad absurdum

<haze> yes,Perhaps some equation,including many factors that could tell a more
+true story than cash.

<ffunch> We need to use happiness and quality of living as the statistic we seek.

<cbwillis> we should not gloss over people's need for cash in taking care of
+their survival

<ffunch> Just don't know how to count quality of life.

<ffunch> Cash is part of the pictuyre. And at this point we certainly all need it.

<cbwillis> we should not make nothing of their concerns for survival

<ffunch> You're right.

<cbwillis> but we can design better ways to survive where we can all win,
+SHOULD *ALL* WIN!

<haze> perhaps if forbes top 500 richest people also published the top 500
+with better lives.

<ffunch> Survival is of course part of quality of life. I'd just like to get it
+separated somewhat from cash.

<ffunch> Yes, we need a top 500 of the happiest people.

<ffunch> Having one's standard of living tied so intimately to cash is a problem, I
+think.

<cbwillis> I had a conversation last week with a yoga teacher who had 6 videos
+published.

<haze> Ofcourse this list would include drug users,and extemeists and
+therefore societys negative propaganda would shoot it to pieces.

<ffunch> One might be very happy living on the beach in hawaii even when making no
+money.

<cbwillis> My impression when I saw her work was that she was going to be very
+wealthy because people would LOVE her work.

<cbwillis> She said to me in full confidence: I am already very wealthy...

<ffunch> Well, it could be a way of overcoming society's biases. 

<cbwillis> because people tell me everyday how yoga changed their life, healed
+them, brought them closer to God

<ffunch> Happiness i more important than fitting into society's norms.
*** Signoff: cbwillis (Leaving)

<ffunch> CB, I can relate somewhat with that.

<haze> i find myself much happier when i am introverted within a small chosen
+group of people vice the subjective toughts of the poplutaion in general.

<ffunch> Ups, CB left.

<ffunch> I think happiness is found much more in small groups.

<ffunch> Your'e happy when you do what you want with a few people you enjoy ebing
+with.

<haze> maybe,although sad ,people just aren't capable of really living in a
+big world like we have now.

<ffunch> Well, it is kind of too big to relate to in one chunk.

<haze> perhaps the tribal groups were developed for a reason.

<ffunch> We need to break it down into human-sized chunks.

<ffunch> YEs, I do think we need to have tribes.

<ffunch> Communities, teams, families.

<ffunch> Life is more meaningful if you can relate it to a group of people that you
+know well.

<haze> maybe if each state were to adopt a set of ideas and principles and
+then everyone could just trade house and go to the state that fit them best.

<ffunch> A group should be something one has a chance of influencing.

<ffunch> I like that. Somebody called it "voting with one's feet"

<ffunch> everybody just goes to the place that suits the way they want to live.

<haze> Exactly.then you wouldn't be living around people who might condemn you
+for your religion or your taste in music or whatever.

<ffunch> There would be no need to judge each other if we all had free choice to go
+and hang out with the people we wanted to be with.

<ffunch> Right. People with the same religious beliefs can group together if they
+want, and theyre free to keep out stuff they don't like. 

<ffunch> But nobody has any right to try to impose their way of living on everybody
+else.

<haze> this wold incorporate adding power to the states and having a minimal
+federal government.

<ffunch> Right.

<haze> All welfair progams could be handled at local levels,people helping
+their own.

<ffunch> And I would see it in smaller chunks than states actually.

<ffunch> Exactly.

<ffunch> The power should be local. Only need for federal levels would be in
+representing the whole area externally, and for sorting out a few internal
+conflicts.

<haze> More of a commune than a state although that isn't the best choice of
+words either.

<ffunch> No big government should be going around telling everybody how to live.

<haze> the federal government could handle distribution of land to the various
+group.

<ffunch> No community should be bigger than one could be able to leave.

<haze> When one group got more people and need to expand these acyions would
+be federally coordinated.

<ffunch> A one country chunk is much too big and a state probably is too.

<ffunch> Right. It starts from the bottom. And groups then get coordinated.

<ffunch> So, there are certain optimum sized for different kinds of groups, I would
+think.

<haze> yes,if people were divided more like a flowchart.groups then smaller
+group then smaller where each of the larger gorups were less specific than
+the smaller.

<ffunch> Right. And I think the key is to start with the local level, having the
+power local, and then build bigger and bigger groupings.

<haze> For example.2 groups pro-drugs,anti-drugs-each group gets half of the
+lnad (or equiv based on number of peope)

<ffunch> Essential is, though, that the power actually IS local. I would see that
+including stuff like defense, building codes, sexual preferences, rules on
+what one can eat, etc, etc.

<haze> then within the anti-drug group they could be further divedied into
+(medicinal use only,NONE)

<ffunch> Right. And nobody would have a right to go into a group and try to attack
+their rules becaus they don't like thm.

<haze> yes.be back in ONE minute.
*** haze has left channel #ncn
*** haze (~haze@205.160.162.74) has joined channel #ncn

<ffunch> If you hate drugs, go to the anti-drug, drugfree community. If you like
+doing drugs you go to the community where that is perfectly alright.

<haze> Sorry about that-i haven't registered my IRC program yet.

<ffunch> And I think this must start from taking responsibility for our local areas,
+and expecting that we CAN live as we want.

<ffunch> resistered?

<haze> Exacly.then allll we have to do is establish a map or grid for the
+entire area and everyone can pick a place to live.

<ffunch> Right. You can get any mode of living you want. Just a matter of picking the
+area or  community.

<haze> yes,i am trying a new IRC prgogram(shareware with 30 min time limit)

<ffunch> Oh

<ffunch> I think the Internet contributes well to these ideas.

<ffunch> Being aware that there are all kinds of prefrences out there.

<ffunch> We need to get more tolerant of diversity.

<haze> So ,ideally there would be a place where you could live with people
+sharing the same beliefs as you.

<ffunch> So, for groups to work it is essential that the people get together who
+actually belong together.

<ffunch> Right, there should be a place for anybody.

<haze> unless ofcourse you ideal grup included people who were opposites(such
+as someone who thrives on debate)

<ffunch> Each local community would set its own rules.

<ffunch> Yes, some people might prefer an area of conflict and argument.

<haze> And the government should be capable of adapting quickly to changes in
+those beliefs.

<ffunch> Only overall rule would be that one coulen't walk into somebody else's
+community and start breaking down their accepted norms.

<ffunch> Government would have no say over the beliefs, but would need to serve all
+the exitannt preferences.

<ffunch> existant, I mean

<haze> For example 87% of people admit they exceed the speed limits on the
+highways;Now if this is a government for the poepe,by the people,why aren't
+the limits higher in the first place?

<ffunch> Right. Obviously people want it to be different.

<ffunch> Direct democracy is a part of this.

<haze> precisely,the internet is the only way something like this could be
+achieved.

<haze> A central computer could contain all the info on local groups and
+therefore peope could petition to enter a new community should their beliefs
+change or for a child who grows up and moves on.

<ffunch> I think it is developing naturally through the Internet. We just need to go
+through some challenges and confrontations along the way.

<ffunch> NCN could play a part in that.

<ffunch> Also I was looking yesterday at a directory of intentional communities.
+Categorizing communities by what their preferences and rules are.

<ffunch> FIC - Fellowship of Intentional Communities, I think the organization is
+called.

<haze> The first steps would be to reduce the centralized power today(although
+bombing federal buildings is a bit drastic)

<haze> FIC is one the net?

<ffunch> A bit drastic yes. But it is one sign that faith in federal governments is
+waning.

<haze> Even more so now with the budget problems.

<ffunch> Yes, they're on the net. I think I have a link from my New Ciilization
+Resources page.

<ffunch> I met yesterday with Lois Arkin who is part of it, and who cooprdinates a
+community in inner Los Angeles.

<haze> it seems odd that more peole aren't here for the chat?

<ffunch> Yes, don't know what it is. Usually weve been 5 people or less.

<ffunch> Possibly people have technical problems getting to IRC.

<ffunch> I'm thinking of making a web chat area.

<haze> FIC sounds like a great idea,except the community is still subject to
+local,state and federal laws.

<haze> How many people are on the NCN mailing list?

<ffunch> That is part of the problem. The federal system doesn't quite support the
+idea of local choice.

<ffunch> Take for example building codes. You can't just get some land and build to
+your preference and budget.

<haze> I will try and add some NCN related pages to my web site.they might
+grab a few more people.

<ffunch> Some pressure needs to be excerted, to make it clear that local communities
+can and want to decide things by themselves.

<ffunch> By all means.

<ffunch> I'm also thinking of ways of adding more interativity to web pages.

<ffunch> MAking them spaces you can visit and interact with other people who are
+around.

<haze> it's a shame too;But they insist that these laws are for "your
+protection" and the average person seldom doubts it.fuckin propaganda.

<ffunch> More people are seeing through the scam day by day.

<ffunch> The laws are less and less for anybody's good.

<ffunch> Change will have to start from taking local responsibility, I think.

<haze> have you seen the add-a-link pages ?

<ffunch> I think I've seen several different. Which one do you think of.

<ffunch> I have about 100 links from other web areas, so I get a lot of traffic from
+other places.

<ffunch> Anyway, I need to get on with the day's program. I think this has been a
+nice chat.

<haze> I have a CGI script somewhere for a page of links that inludes a form
+for adding a link via the web ;it's nothing greatly interactive but it is a
+good way for people to provide inputs.

<ffunch> Can you send it to me?

<ffunch> I'm playing with scripts myself now. LEaning PERL.

<haze> Me too.Although we didn't really accomplish anything.who knows about
+tomorrow?

<ffunch> I'm writing scripts from updating NCN member information on-line.

<haze> Sure i will dig it up and e-mail it in.

<ffunch> I'm almost ready to put up my member forms.

<ffunch> Anyway, good to talk to you.

<haze> GREAT ! i would love to see more people involved.

<haze> you too.Good day.

<ffunch> It will happen.