Ranting to Rational

Indulged in a bit of a rant last night at a meeting. Didn't even realize the root of it until someone pointed out the desperation. I would have said discouragement, but clearly there was emotion I thought I had been controlling. Not that my reasons for feeling such things were not legitimate, but rants are rarely helpful.

I had felt some personal triumph this week after reaching out to someone who had ranted against me regarding my OCF logo products that I had worked so hard on. After stewing about it for several months I finally realized that of course the intent, if personal at the time, was not really personal and would have dissipated by now, so I reached out to the person. I second-guessed as I waited for a reply...what had I really wanted or thought might result? I had apologized, and then made a couple of excuses (bad form in an apology, always...you can't say "but" and defend yourself...) and it was clear that I had wanted an apology in return. That was what I meant by the coded language of "clearing the air." I wanted to give them the opportunity to take it back, even though the public damage couldn't be taken back (hopefully it was subtle and won't have lasting effects.) I felt that reaching out had been an emotional risk and it turned out to be the right thing to do. I was able to be helpful to the person with some logistical  information they needed to get to the goal they expressed rather ineffectively. We will maybe be allies in getting some progress in a weighty area of policy that could use some attention to head off numerable rants-to-be by others in similar positions. I was able to clear the way for my own creativity to resume, and I also was encouraged to discover that other people share my goal of clarifying OCF consensus-seeking process. People have forgotten that alternative organizations chose consensus-seeking as a process despite the weight, for the inclusivity and fairness it can bring. It's not an easy process to participate in, but the results are usually positive.

Always learning, un-learning, re-learning. I made a hat of that once, but it didn't sell. We tend to wish our lives were some linear progress to some enlighted place...but our realities involve lots of stepping back as we re-assess and examine our strategies when they don't get the needs met. Sometimes it is possible to get our needs met (especially if we just want the juiciness of drama) but we have to step back when we see that we have just tromped on some greater needs.The more people who are involved, the more feet to step on, but also the glimmer of a chance of improving or at least protecting the common good.

It's a goal to be level-headed, not respond to pointless drama, and to suggest strategies and solutions that actually move the issues forward...but those kind of conscious goals are really easy to lose sight of, particularly during meetings where so many people express so many diverse thoughts. I guess that is the joy and challenge of participatory decision-making.

So how to gain the respect of others and work as allies? First all present have to be willing to extend respect to others and themselves by being focused, rational, and not be driving a limited agenda. Meetings, especially public ones, are not a great place to make speculation aloud...like the questioning of Craft Committee motives that happened at the Board meeting this month. What? End run? I have no idea what that means in the mind of the person, a leader, who threw that into the mix. Craft Committee submitted two recommendations for guideline changes, a process that happens once a year. They were simple changes to wording in existing guidelines, nothing we thought was the least bit controversial. One we viewed as a tool to assist the management and crew, as well as the Board, and protect them from legal action. The reception was bizarre.

The end result was a guideline change that was not helpful to our goal of clarifying and communicating policy and it didn't add the tool we suggested. I suppose we failed to communicate our goal. Within the restriction of the atmosphere of suspicion of our motives, nothing could have been accomplished and at least I feel punished for trying. Looking ahead, I see that it is paramount that we communicate our goals and examine ourselves to see if we are trying to drive a limited agenda. We have to take the high road and not indulge in drama, irrational emotions, or allow ourselves to be discouraged if we don't get our needs met. No rants.

It's helpful to remember that we are having about 15,000 different Fairs out there, all at once. The work that is done in between the events is being done by thousands of individuals trying to sustain and promote their interpretation of the Fair. Working on the guidelines as we have been doing diligently for the last year shows us that the policies are confusing, repetitive, contradictory, and sometimes even incoherent. Considering that they develop over time through the small actions of individuals, it isn't surprising, but it does make for a daunting body of policy, procedures, practices, precedents, and plain old poop. There is a reason that people say we have guidelines and not rules. Lots of people feel misunderstood and discouraged, not just me.

It is common for involved people to feel like walking away, and they often have to go through a long process of re-learning to find their commitment again and clarify what they hope to accomplish. Seeking consensus can be a harsh process and often people find the messiness too much for their sense of order and fairness. All of us come from the similar place of attachment and ownership, whether or not that is real. Virtually all Fair volunteers feel love for the event and the organization and a desire to do their best to preserve and protect it. So these differences of opinion and misconceptions can't throw us off-track. The good news is that power politics is generally shown in the transparent recording of the meetings and rarely gets far. Selfishness and limited agendas are exposed and set aside by the diligence of the goal of seeking the common good. While vague as a concept, we all know when the common good is emerging and when it is being thwarted.

When I first started volunteering in addition to selling and doing work for various Fair entities (I print things) I promised myself I would not get offended. That means by any person, any act, or any interpretation of such. This has been something I have had to remind myself of many times and here it is again. It won't help to rant or to quit in disgust. My goal is to foster clear communication and assist others in getting their needs met. I take minutes and write things and pay close attention to what is actually said and done, not to personalities and foibles and misconceptions and rumors. I have to find those amusing when they surface, but keep my goals in mind. It doesn't have to be complicated. I knew it wouldn't be easy.

I can step it up a little bit. I know my fellow crafters and volunteers will all benefit as we gain understanding and respond to coherent and sensible policy. It isn't my job to make changes but rather to shine a light and help others find the tools they need. Change is glacial in policy-making and that is probably a good thing. Laws shouldn't be made for the few but for the common good. Any feelings that come to me are pretty much beside the point.

Okay, now I can go on. That wasn't so hard. Probably not a very entertaining post, but that is why I write a semi-personal blog. If it helps someone, good, but like we say about the Jell-O Art Show, first it has to be fun for us. OCF is more fun for me when I just concentrate on my art and my work. I successfully cleared the way for getting my interest back in making new products, with one email. Maybe with one report I can get back on track with the rest. Hope springs eternal.