[GPSCC-chat] critical mass

[John Thielking]

i apologize if this email gets scrambled etc since i'm sending it from a place that has no bars on my phone and i keep getting error messages after sending email.  anyway, i think that the issue of critical mass on committees is in a bit of a grey area right now as we have at least 3 individuals who are acting on their own to some degree on behalf of the green party.  there is john thielking doing peacemovies. there is spencer doing move your money and foreclosures.  there is caroline doing tabling withthe help of a few others.  so to say that we can't have committees of one person may be a bit inconsistent with present reality.  we could then focus on how much autonomy these individuals can have while still representing the green party.  for instance i would be free to organize an event sponsored by peacemovies without getting cc approval since it would not yet be a green party event.  but i would not assume that i could organize a gp event without prior approval. what do you think about that and how is that going to change if at all if we break up into committees?  john thielking 
-----Original Message-----
Date: Sunday, December 23, 2012 6:03:03 pm
To: spencer.graves at prodsyse.com, tnharter at aceweb.com
Cc: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
From: "John Thielking" <pagesincolor at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] critical mass

spencer could you please prepare the new agenda and print it out?
-----Original Message-----
Date: Sunday, December 23, 2012 3:06:35 pm
To: "Tian Harter" <tnharter at aceweb.com>
Cc: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
From: "Spencer Graves" <spencer.graves at prodsyse.com>
Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] critical mass

Hi, Tian et al.:


       There are only two items on the agenda that need a decision 
before Jan. 24 if we are to support them:


             * Do we want to endorse Move to Amend's January 15 teach-in 
on Citizens United?


             * Do we want to be listed as a "Community Partner" of 
"Silicon Valley Reads"?  They want to know by January 1 or so.


       Introductions and announcements can be handled less formally, and 
report backs on events since the last meeting can be postponed until our 
Jan. 24 meeting, I think.


       Acceptable?
       Spencer


On 12/23/2012 2:32 PM, Tian Harter wrote:
> On 12/23/2012 01:57 PM, Jim Doyle wrote:
>> One of the postings discuss