Event:2015/03/15 Conflict Mediation Potluck + Discussion

Introductions

 * Mary: co-organizer of Counter Culture Labs, Counter Culture Labs delegate, mediator in current conflict.
 * Julio - interested in the process. seemingly conflicting goals need to be met. maybe policy needs to just be communicated & understood instead of changed.
 * Laura - involved with many omni/baps things. concerned about division within community about conflict process. Has ideas on how to make the process work better and get through the current moment. Loves people here and loves the Omni.
 * Kevin - has been involved in various groups. but has been putting energy into this. And sees a bleeding problem (conflicts), and resolution process is pretentious.
 * Yar - Sudo member. Not too sure of intentions/expectations from this meeting. trying to learn where everyone is coming from.
 * Rachel - Expects conversation about peace at the omni. This is the goal here.
 * Joe - Food Not Bombs, formerly Commons. Not at peace with the situation of conflict. Harder to deal with. Like that things are changing.interested in creating a space that's supportive of all kinds of people, FNb has been a great learning experience, hope to go through a new phase of the learning experience at the omni
 * Paula - not super new to omni, haven't been around much, intend to move closer and be more involved, learning slowly this process, the policies, how they get made at the omni, just bc i think that sutff is really crucial to be created there and be sustained and i want to be a part of what omni creates in the community, help with visioning outreach, for [people to understand what omni is and create what omni is, that space is intricate in the community, a history, ppl, culture, a lot of that needs to be respected in this process too (anthro undergrad, my heads a lot in culture, cultural relativity, how we understand needs of our community, create comm that supports that, flows with it
 * Rachel
 * Jenny
 * Amgo

What are people's goals for the meeting?

 * Mary: I want to focus on the conflict mediation and resolution process. This conflict has hurt on both sides and there is elements of prejudice that are particularly important to me. In the process of collecting statements and putting a group mediation together with respect to Kwic being invited back into the space, I was informed the day of mediation, by a third party, that the process I was using was dismissive to the "victims." I am currently in mediation for this as of Friday night. I have not been informed of who I hurt or how my way of communicating was dismissive, so i don't know how I can change. There is no avenue for me to apologize either.
 * Mary: I want to know why people are scared to talk to each other to make solutions. How the omni supporting the second pillar of our safe space policy to promote accountibility and transformation for thoe who harm?
 * Mary: There is another issue which is how interpersonal conflict affects others in the space. There are many people who used to be regulars in the space but have stopped coming because of the current epidemic of conflict and poor communication.
 * Mary: I am currently avoiding the Omni because I don't know who I have harmed and I am afraid of causing greater harm unintentionally. The lack of upfront communication has led to a culture of fear for me.
 * Laura: My concern is that if we continue that pattern of communication, it's dfficult and challenging for people and we won't get anywhere.
 * yar: we should all hear each other's intentions and where we're coming from before we set the tone for anyone else. some of the things people say, they're general and i don't know what they mean, without specifics
 * Laura is happy to explain it at some point if you want to talk about it
 * Paula: isn't that part of what this meeting is for?
 * Laura: I'm happy to talk about it when it's the appropriate time, yes
 * amgo - Most interested in preventative conflict mediation--how to build solidarity and trust so we can educate one another about our own internalized oppressive behaviors with love and trust
 * I imagine that being somewhat informal - first up Feminist Frat
 * I second this
 * Laura - The way we communicate
 * Kevin - hopes for higher-level discussions for this meeting.
 * Mary: What about our current process works and what part of our current process is not working. Why are people scared to talk to each other directly to resolve conflict?
 * Mary:19:07 Contacted restorative Justice center of berkeley to schedule intensive training for intereseted Omni Mediators
 * Mary:19:09 I want the Omni to be a place where all ideas can be voiced and all differences embraced.
 * Mary:19:09 Whay are poeple so scared to talk to each other directly?
 * Mary:19:12 Create more events that build community in and out of the Omni, like picnics and neighborhood trash clean ups
 * Julio: Laura's mention for non-violent communication training
 * Laura: Bay Area Non-Violent Communication Org wants to do a full day seminar in our ballroom- trying to work out exchange for trade to train Omni folks
 * Diana: Do we need a more formal group of mediators or those involved in conflict to come together/meet/coordinate?
 * Joe: Do convene to bring each other up to speed, see what is and isn't working, be a body that informs itself and the rest of the omni about whats going on
 * Kevin: at time it was conceived, it was as a phone tree, not as a group formally, really good arguments in both dir's, against: desire not have group become an ERSATS police thing, emphasis remain on the interpersonal relationship and that that power not be concentrated between a few ppl at the omni, on the other hand there's clearly a need for communications
 * Julio: What is your dream for this? Agrees with what others have already said, let's make sure we understand the policy, if it is clear but people don't know about it how can we make it more. Or the buddy system, is a great idea, in an ideal world we wouldn't need an intermediary, some of us are in diff levels of awareness rather than go from microagressions to this thing and a banning, there might be microinterventions that can be had, and usually its not the person who's being hurt, there should be some system, even if it's just a few names, that's my dream, partially. And I think we should probably early on define what was unclear to yar in terms of diff perspectives, we all had diff perspectives and biases as to "there's too many people who are banned, or not enough" maybe it's okay as long as we're following a process, don't want to say it's bad to reshape what that looks like, i agree we should, but it would help if it was more specific and a little bit of a discussion on this general topic and too many people being banned and what an improvement would look like, in small steps, and i don't know if you want to have that discussion now and i know there's confusion about what the issue is
 * yar: just asking that when ppl talk try not to talk in big generalities, but more specifically, often if someone has to decide what you mean, what's most obv what's the worst case scenario, could lead to tension where it's not necessary
 * Diana: You or Rachel any other hopes for this meeting specifically?
 * yar : one my biggest worries is critical mass of dominant culture ideology with or without realizing it will define the space in its early days into something that will make the ppl who need the space the most decide "this isn't the place for me", and that ppl will join the omni who don't even care or have an ideology that it doesn't matter or race and gender are meaningless and think a sea of white dudes is normal or they don't need to change that, to me that's not okay that would be a failure of the omni
 * Rachel: I second that
 * Joe: conflicts, and/or way processes they've been dealt with have created serious fissures, divisions in the omni, first thing that needs to happen is we find ways to repair those harms....well um, right now it's between Mary and the mediation she was trying to do and the person that called her out and said she needs to go into mediation, she's afraid to come, here i think, the omni, before that, what rings clear and true, i think you're referring to ryan, doesn't feel safe, he said the ppl who are asking for mods in process, just talking about it makes him physically sick a level of safety and understanding we haven't even begun to address
 * yar: what i'm talking about is much bigger than ryan, since before that conflict escalated. Partially, my understanding of that situation was unwelcome touching...and the fundamental issue was a solid support from everyone in the building that it is ok for him to express his desire not to be touched and that is totally valid.
 * Mary:19:18 We are building a culture of consent....do we allow room for misunderstandings and mistakes? Are we banning behaviors or people? People can change if they are allowed to have new experiences. Restorative, changing the dominant culture is the real work of this project. Why are some individuals banned from the Omni for violent behaviors and others not?
 * yar: there's people who aren't banned for violent behavior? who?
 * Mary: This is for an in person discussion as I was not present at these events and I think it is wrong to talk about people when they are not present.
 * yar: that's fair. personally i take that very seriously and think we should solve that problem. also not to be all religious but in judaism the rules of lashon hara (for example) do allow for sharing information in emergencies or to address a particular problem. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lashon_hara
 * Mary: I can put you in contact with people who were in situations first hand, but to comment on your point: We have been trying to make a network of people in the community to act as onsite mediators to address conflict when it happens. This way we can build community and integrity in the space, as we learn to trust and count on each other.
 * paula: thanks for that insight, yar
 * Laura: Dominant cultures have led to dysfunctional ways of communicating that keep us apart. How we learn and interpret our feelings. I need to take responsibility for how I feel, think, act. and mindfulness on how my brain interferes with what I observe. Am I allowing for emotional reactions from my own interpretations rather than what is happening in front of me. there are ways of thinking about what I am going to say and express in a way that enables building closer relationships and meeting different people's needs. we can't get anywhere in this challenging and emotional conversation unless we express the intention that we want to meet everyone's needs as much as we possibly can in whatever issues there are. and that we each trust that others value what is important for us, and others feel they can trust me.
 * Paula: to get to know people we need gatherings and let people shine. i think that has been an issue - the level to which there are events just focused on getting to know one another, and know where people are coming from can create the necessary openness to hearing each other out and knowing each other's needs.
 * tldr the way we talk to each other is dysfunctional

Discussion

 * What has started to happen positively? What are things that are problematic? What do we hope for? How do we get there (processes, systems)?
 * GROUND RULE:
 * let's accept that people are coming from different people places and with different truths.
 * And using I Statements as much as we can.None of us chose our childhood, nor the default behaviors we learned during this time.

1. Current situation

 * Current forms of enforcement are done as individuals, and not as representing the entire Omni
 * Laura: what have people observed is going on?
 * Kevin: system is working but having effects beyond what is intended. in review of bans, they seem legitimate. The problem is that people have feelings of conflict and alienation.
 * Mary: Alienation of people not directly involved in conflict, as well.
 * Laura: what have you observed that made you feel this way?
 * Kevin: Mary's statements, e.g.
 * Rachel: I've also heard this, mainly from people who've been banned and their friends, also bystanders who don't understand the entirety of the situation. In a select few cases people know all the details and do feel this way, but most of this rhetoric is coming from not-fully-informed parties
 * Julio: Don't feel that all bans have been fair, but know that i don't know everything that happened - but i do trust in those who are making these decisions. Second Mary's question, are we banning behaviors or people? Doesn't like the idea that we're banning individuals b/c they did something they shouldn't have
 * Jenny: There's a misperception that bans are happening without attempts at reconciliation prior - in every instance this year the individuals asked to leave were approached about their behavior beforehand on multiple occasions - those are often abusive conversations. This is a lot of hard work that I have also engaged. As a 2nd point, these are not isolated incidents but patterns of behaviors where the behaviors persists to a point where ways forward have been shut down. even acknowledging problematic behaviors are also a challenge, so they continue to be repeated. at the root are individuals not even willing to acknowledge the issue.
 * one person said to jenny: "i'm never going to change, i'm 66 years old"
 * Rachel: seconds this statement and has seen these emotional effects on those involved, whether directly or as mediators/stewards, and that other steps were taken initially
 * Joe: it does seem like we should be able to be more creative rather than being so punitive. in some cases, yes, people do deserve it if they say they don't give a shit and not willing to engage. but with R., it is a different case where there are also mental health issues. how can we have more flexibility, creativity and so that it does not fall on so few people's shoulders. You have put more info on the asked to leave page and that has been a big help. Now we can see how is someone's steward. The policy was made with a lot of care in terms of principles and content, but think it can be improved as it has divided us. we have seen friends yearning for different kind of treatment. and mediation committee should meet regularly.
 * Mary: A restorative system bans behaviors, a punitive system bans people.
 * C from fnb wanted a different kind of treatment
 * Rachel: let's be mindful about how we talk about marginalization/dominant cultures in general ways - in terms of how patterns reflect race/gender power and privilege/relations. sometimes we invoke these issues too soon, but it hinges more on the personal and only tertiarily effected by dom culture, in other situations it takes too long to bring up the dynamics of dom culture that are present and direct
 * also the divide between members/non-members, in terms of inclusion/exclusion becomes an "act of publicity" when a non-member feels they have not been treated correctly, that non-member often talks harshly about the Omni at large, as a group, and blames the system (bc they haven't experienced membership)- rather than pinpointing the specifics of their own conflict; on the other hand these extreme offensive statements towards the entire membership may leave us reluctant to question those dynamics, which are there (though to a much lesser extent than this negative rhetoric from banees would imply)
 * Julio: also if people are getting harmed in the process of mediation, that could be a symptom of a problem in the process. What are ways to address situations before they escalate?
 * Laura: when there was a week when many people were asked to leave, I was only peripherally aware of these. the level of tension of the people I was working with dropped immediately. as we are just getting to be fully functional, i think in that sense the process was successful. when people discussed reactions of people being asked to leave, many feel sad when it gets to the point of asking someone to leave. Especially when it is for something like sleeping or a neurological problem. I noticed expressions of sadness, when they made the statements without specifying which individual cases affected them, targets of the oppressive behavior interpreted the sadness as directed toward their situation. they then got the feeling people were questioning their own agency - when people were bringing up a more general sense of sadness or were not targeting particular cases. Also if these policies policies are to help us create a space where people who are often oppressed by dominant culture feel comfortable/safe - then the policy is not working because several people are not feeling safe enough in the space to be there.
 * Jenny: one concern I have is about pace of going through the mediation process. there is urgency among mediators to resolve and bring people back to the community as quickly as possible. this is harmful for those affected and feeling pushed to have conversations too soon...and we need to be sensitive to both parties
 * Paula: also consider how people being banned are feeling as well. Isn't it also acknowledging helping all people harmed from conflict (which is in the policy). so think about both sides.
 * Joe: one harm is that people are banned. Heard from a restorative justice workshop: "people given the opportunity to participate should be equipped to do so in an effective and meaningful way."
 * Jenny: felt specifically the mediation process with Kwic was pushed to be resolved too fast. in the past, had separate individual conversations to move forward first, before deciding next steps on bringing people together or not...but give each person space to state perspectives in full and decide whether to all sit down together.
 * Mary: There had been 4 weeks since the ban, 3 weeks towards gathering information and proper consent for space and time to hold a mediated conversation. Those who were not ready were not pestered. By working through conflict the process can begin, changes can begin. The mediation on Friday was communicated via email as a start to a process where the core issues can be addressed and communication complications can be ironed out.
 * Laura: mediation is learnt. to be a mediator, people need to be equipped to do it.
 * Jenny: what does/should a community mediation process look like? For example, it isn't fair to ask one person to represent a dozen people when many are affected by a conflict behavior/situation
 * Laura: proposes people contact Mary to be flexible with next steps for this particular situation.
 * Joe: now that Mary is in a mediation process, can we say this should have more time?
 * Jenny: the policy was more for interpersonal conflict rather than community conflict process.
 * Action: Julio will follow up to get more people and move it forward. Rachel willing to be a steward but not a mediator. Kevin too.
 * Mary: A restorative system bans behaviors, a punitive system bans people.

2. Vision - if the system were working, what would it look like?

 * Do not want to become policing group
 * yar does not like the word "police" being thrown around here. it's not the same thing. it's actually a very inflammatory wedge in the wrong direction.
 * Maintain the values that Omni is a space for challenging dominant cultures
 * Transformative justice implies somebody is actually transforming. Instead of transforming we have people doubling down in denial.
 * Rachel seconds this statement just above ^
 * Mediators should be equipped to do that work.
 * Mary: Contacted the Restorative justice Center of Berkeley to Schedule intensive training for all those who have an interest in being onsite mediators. Costs will be covered.
 * Kevin: The policy is working - it causes discomfort, and people are perceiving this discomfort as a problem with the process. It's okay to be uncomfortable. Doesn't feel great, but it's not wrong.
 * Yar: We value transformative justice, would like to see a lot more transforming going on. Instead of transforming, seems like people are just doubling down asserting they're fine as they are. That's not transformative justice. Part of the point of transformative justice is that people go away for awhile, *transform*, and then come back into the community. Our project here is to create revolutionaries out of people who aren't yet revolutionaries.
 * Mary: Change is difficult. And the conflicts in the space have helped me define my voice. I am commited to the change that is needed in the world. If we can not commit to this as a community, to transform those who do harm, may I suggest that we remove that statement from our wiki page.
 * Rachel: Most of us have too much on our plate for it to be anyone's job to help people transform. Direct them to resources, keep track of what they're doing - that should be the responsibility (secondary to also making it easier for survivors to feel okay being in the space). We need to come up with procedures for following the transformation of a person.
 * Joe: One of the important aspects of transformation in the Omni is that people feel more comfortable in saying what they're feeling - being more open in that communication
 * Kevin: Fomenting trust in the space is the soft policy and centering safety is the hard policy. Helps clarify things for me that *transformative justice does not happen in the space*. What do people think about the idea of having someone who acts as a contact for a person asked to leave over the long term.
 * Rachel: Maybe we could provide for each other an alternative therapy
 * Joe: more people coming out and exercising peer pressure toward Omni norms and values.
 * Yar: we were doing that informally - trusting human relationships. And one of the problems over the past few weeks, is that the people doing that, saw their support networks maligned as a backchannel. Unofficially, people are supporting one another and that has been what has carried the Omni thus far. Some amount of trust would go a long way for the people who are already doing that work.
 * Joe: If more people knew, you might get more support.
 * Rachel: I have noticed that as people transitioned to Omni, the support network became a smaller proportion of people within Omni where it had been primarily at the past space.
 * Yar: would love to see the organically growing support network be recognized in a more formal way. The people doing the labor necessary, but more people need to be doing it. And people doing the emotional labor recognize each other.
 * Kevin: interested in this topic. But don't know who the network is nor asked to participate. Happy to share the emotional labor. Friendships may be a self-selection process.
 * Julio seconds. And appreciates all that has been going on. How to grow it to include men who can support and take on some of that labor?
 * Kevin: Matt had brought up the idea for a men's group, way for men to recognize, self-educate and find ways to support those be
 * Mary:19:12 Create more events that build community in and out of the Omni, like picnics and neighbor hood trash clean ups :)
 * Mary: CC the CDC in conflict mediation dialogue? Privacy and consent was taken throughout the mediation process, in order to for all parties to go into the mediation process in good faith.
 * Jenny: in the mediation conflict previously, they discussed protecting privacy of those involved/others implicated. mailing lists are publicly archived on the internet, so it may not be a good idea. But could privately talk with people on CDC for feedback...and asked for suggestions. making conflicts publicly archivable would be problematic. Another tricky point is openness and how public conflict details should be shared. Vision would be balancing these.
 * Yar: There is a mediation mailing list that is not publicly archived.
 * Julio: it is good that you did that. It is good to get feedback if someone private.
 * Rachel: balancing transparency and privacy are important. You don't want to incriminate people, or share things that survivors don't want shared. and there are some cases there are false accusations. Would prefer privacy more as you cannot take back info that is out there.
 * Mary: full disclosure of the process and who has access to the list is very important. Clear protocols for confidential discourse should also exist, but if it involves people being banned, they should know why. And the community may be apprised of the basic story, perhaps?
 * amgo: I've noticed full disclosure is trickier than it sounds. Hard to include everyone in communication. How do we make systems to do that?
 * Joe: it may be good to go back to the policy.
 * Yar: if there are enough people involved and supported in conflict mediation the process could be effective. we are testing it now with our own efforts.
 * Mary: that's why i am involved in the process.

3. How do we get there?
--> skipped this section since we are running out of time and people are fading.
 * Processes and Structures
 * Joe: Mediation committee should meet regularly, proactive working with people earlier than later
 * Laura: NVC training for mediators.yes!
 * Julio: 'buddies' who can step in to call people out gently before they escalate.Yeah!

4. What are next steps? (Actions)

 * Jenny: case studies on mediation cases? and a mediation wiki with tips and sharing? self-education on successful mediation. Jenny was also working with David to set up Orientation for volunteers.
 * Joe: read more about mediation. will read the toolkit once it is up. and will try to find way to talk more to people within the support network. See how to pass the test.
 * Diana: Report back to CDC. Was this conversation useful? Should we do it again? Excited about NBV training. Maybe some form of event for community socializing/building trust?
 * Rachel: Go to NVC training, read the wiki, reach out re: conflicts I'm involved with right now, research into transformative justice systems
 * Yar: #transfauxmativejustice, check it out. Focusing on self-care in general, continuing to try to articulate personal visions of what Omni should be, continue to give hugs to all I see doing incredible feats of emotional labor, trying to stay positive - it's awesome to have the opportunity to crate a space that could actually live up to our values. Most humbling experience of my life - looking back at our first meetings in 2013,
 * Kevin: Gonna attend the training, take more steps to be proactive in the space re: who is troublesome to others, conspire w/ julio and matt to form a men's group.
 * Laura: Make this training happen; need to reach out about a conflict i'm personally involved in; am available for whoever needs to talk about things (supportive listening); don't personally want to do mediation but would like to offer process support (conflict steward? in general, setting up meetings so that people can feel understood and heard).
 * Julio: Everything y'all already said, going to talk with Mary, and Laura re: process help; i want to make myself more available for support; offloading people who are doing too much; volunteer baiting
 * Also, ways to help people know what are the values of the Omni.
 * Laura: Not comfortable with people just stepping up and saying "I'd like to be a mediator" without having any training or orientation prior.
 * Joe: Mediation group should include the backup, those handling theory, trainings, etc