User:OneKarma/Notes

“Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius — and a lot of courage — to move in the opposite direction.” - A. Einstein

generational

the generation of youth must care for itself, to create stability - Generation Stuck

and College is a money-making scam - 35 Reasons

for 'Dimwits'

Has OneKarma ever been less than extremely polite to you? Join the club. OneKarma is extremely critical of people, especially people who exhibit a lack of logic in their thought processes. If you are one of these people, OneKarma may use 'mean words' when he talks to or about you. If you grew up in an English-speaking household in the U.S.A., he will not have any mercy toward your lack of writing proficiency, and he will denigrate you to the highest degree if you cannot at least understand his point. He comes from the point of view of 'not having time for bullshit,' so if you come even close to preventing his intended progression, he will push you aside and forget you.

OneKarma may (eventually) apologize for the negative tone and/or words (hoisting the blame upon a 'mis-communication') for the sake of cooperation toward some newfound (or newly described) goal, but he will still assume that you are a half-wit.

Edit Session

('stolen' from uk wiki https://occupywiki.org.uk/wiki/OccupyWiki:Edit_sessions and https://occupywiki.org.uk/wiki/OccupyWiki:Improvement_ideas)

add '/session' to the end of any page to go to the editing session. this could aid the discussion as being a midway between 'chat' and 'ongoing' styles of discussion. it would link to an open chat, and would be maintained in the 'ongoing' style in order to set agendas for the 'chat', as well as divulging the time/place/directions to the chat (usually virtual).

What is the point of vehement militarization?

At what technological point is there no need to improve? When a single, violent force commands the life and livelihood of the rest, will there be any more justice? Is there ever justice if there is division or oppression?

Division makes us hate our kin, and oppression legitimizes that hatred. Only by establishing a mutual responsible, global community will the human species find peace. There must be an agreement to transparency in government, for only then can the people know the truth of global human interaction.

'Bottom-lining'

"...is when someone takes responsibility for seeing something through to completion. It's a serious committment, and people try to avoid making it because it is serious."

Appeal (?)

I love that people want to create a warm, welcoming, physical space for meeting face to face and for establishing community. But the truth is that this is an outdated 'requirement', because technology allows us to be close by the information we produce and consume more than by our physical closeness. While familiarity in person can and should be used to aid the development of communications, we should not make it a requirement, because it is slowing our progress and limiting our diversity. Contributors have been actively driven away by others who choose to make physical attendance a pre-requisite for contributing. If there is to be a global movement, it will be maintained by the youth who are invested in it. This means an end to the games that have been played around even the notion of revolution. This is a true, humanistic endeavor, and it will not be stopped by any means.

Signature

- [[User:OneKarma|OneKarma]]<span style="letter-spacing: -2px">^{[[User talk:OneKarma|T]]}/_{[[Special:Contributions/OneKarma|C]]}</span> 14:32, 14 December 2011 (EST)

Alienation

I have become alienated by the disorganized mess of 'collaborators' and their methods. I don't have time to see their meetings, nor do I have time or patience for reading their exasperatingly long mailing lists. I must reach out to non-occupiers for support, because they perhaps are capable of thinking about the issues I may present, whereas current occupiers are preoccupied mostly with 'camping' and martyrdom. They claim but do not actually see the bigger picture. They do not include the rest of the 99%. The Occupation is, at most, maybe 2%, with maybe 25% 'in support'. It lacks not only actual unification but also ease of methodology, which is preventing growth and real action.

Frug

(6) Tracking within the Public Schools. Even when public schools admit a diverse group of students, it does not follow that the schools are organized so that the students can learn to engage each other. On the contrary, academic tracking - the division of the student body into fast, average, and slow classes - is standard educational policy in America's public schools, and not just for English and math. Academic tracking is one of the ways Americans first learn that a heterogeneous group should be divided into different spaces - spaces not just for smart and dumb but for whites and blacks, college-bound and vocationally tracked, cool and nerd. This process has helped Americans learn an important, and destructive, lesson from and early age: being in the same space with different kinds of people not only fel uncomfortable but impedes personal advancement. The same attitude helps generate, later in life, support for exclusive suburbs and gated communities.

- Gerald Frug, "The Legal Technology of Exclusion in Metropolitan America"

Issues Dev.

let us be unafraid of making mistakes

issue of multi-media and variety of outlets

there should be only one 'official' place for discussion. Everyone is of course encouraged to use every possible outlet, but there should be a commitment to a primary outlet so that conversation can become centralized and that people can follow the topics they find important.

all or nothing

if the occupation is to host any discussion online, it should be centralized and manageable. if the occupation does not wish to create a central forum online to aid non-'residents', it should make clear that intention so that online contributors may know that their time is being wasted. the occupation should not proclaim to be the 99% if it does not intend to invite those voices.

collaboration blocks

i feel that my attempts at collaboration are being blocked. when it was suggested that i join those mailing lists where discussion was paramount, i could not find the appropriate mailing lists, or when they could be found, i could not find an archive of older messages so i could not fully update myself. additionally, no one has answered my request to help locate such an archive.

the 'groups.occupyboston.org' pages appear to either lack frequent moderation (of which is required by the structure of the site) so that my requests to 'join' the working groups have been either unanswered or ignored. this prevents me from reading all 'non-public' posts, as well as from posting to those groups.

the wiki has neither of the above issues - its structure absolutely prevents such blocks.

personal grudges

i believe that a number of members of the occupation are holding personal grudges against those who do not communicate on their terms. i have noted an authoritative habit within both Facilitation and Tech (OBIT) that has withheld me from being able to discuss ideas. these groups appear to prefer to focus on a morality that they seem unable to dictate, and this focus prevents them from considering a broader spectrum of ideas. i am working under the pressure of grudges held against me for two reasons: 1. i use a strong tone that is sometimes misunderstood as disrespect, and 2. i had 'moved' a great number of wiki pages without the consent of others. i argue that the reactions to these actions have been much more detrimental than the actions themselves.

tone should never prevent discussion from unfolding. the occupation is fueled by adults, and adults should be able to recognize ideas whether or not the words around them are particularly emotional. from the facilitation group, i learned that there is a push for dramatically civil appearances, but not for actual civility. the facilitators, though unable to move beyond emotional drives themselves, are asking others to keep their emotion away from their conversation. an intelligent person should be able to pick out the intention of an argument, and one should not focus on the aspects which do not aid that intention unless they create disparity in the argument, in which case there should be a request for clarification.

the issue of moved pages on the wiki should not be an issue at all, because everyone is capable of making the very same kinds of changes i have made. it takes only a very little amount of exploring to figure these functions out. also, if my notes had not been deleted by Mcktimo, users would have been directed to contact me with their issues, at which point i could facilitate a solution. i have already done so a number of times (both in and out of regard to the particular 'moving' issue), and i have not become aware of any issues that are not easily resolved.

Branch issues

economic and political issues are much too complex for an organization of non-specialists to determine the best possible methods for reform. issues of national law and penal codes can be addressed with a large-enough mass of peoples, but that mass has not yet been organized. the most viable issue for the occupation to address now is the creation of a forum within which specialists and lay-men alike may discuss all the issues.

in an open forum, the issues are on stage instead of the people. there should be topic pages for every aspect of change that the movement wishes to make, and those topic pages should contain references to scientific endeavors or suggest community-wide agreements. the 'attached' discussion pages are the places for opinions and diatribes, but hopefully discussions will be more fluid and progressive than arguments over view-points. the goal here is to create a mass of on-line support for actual discussion of Occupation issues. There should be a passing of ideas back-and-forth and around in every direction

economic/political

this is the main branch of issues that the occupation would like to solve. the problem with attacking on this front is that the spectrum works both top-down and bottom-up, which means one must impart movement in the entirety of the system to effect change in any one part, otherwise the momentum of the (top/bottom) will continue pulling the (bottom/top) in the same old direction. true economic/political change must come from the entire populace, and it must therefore be coordinated on at least a national level. coordination of such a degree, however, seems to be undesirable by the many factions of occupiers.

violence

international

this front also must be fought by the many. awareness is making the species more able and likely to denounce violence, but there are many acts whose motivators have not been fully addressed. particularly, violence occurring upon native peoples must be stopped - but this is an economic issue as well, for much violence is driven by conquerers in the name of the expanding wealth of a nation.

national

domestic (national, not in the home) violence has much to do with the economic functions of society. poverty drives people to commit otherwise unnecessary acts, such as the creation of drug-rings.

it is naturally assumed that one would not commit a crime that is known to be a crime unless there is a more negative consequence to do the crime than to not. petty crime such as small thievery abides a different 'natural law' that can be addressed only when the social scene has become more peaceful, but the basic notion is that goods which are equally accessible do not need to be stolen. crime as a way of sustenance should never be - the community should create an avenue for every person to sustain themselves, not an avenue for just the luckiest x per cent.

governance brutality

police brutality is a focal point for the movement - and for the name of 'justice' everywhere. most police brutality comes as a result of failing social systems in which a majority grows a disrespect for a minority and then begins to act against that minority as if part of a game. offenders in this regard are often not seen as such, because the majority supports the condemnation of a few. but this alludes to a famous parable arising out of the nazi era, saying something to the effect of, "first they came for x, and i didn't speak up because i wasn't an x; then they came for y, and i didn't speak up because i wasn't a y; then they came for z, and i didn't speak up because i wasn't a z; then they came for me, but when i called for help there was no one left to fight with me."

respect

the people need to recognize when a human being is not receiving the respect that should be granted to every one. this may involve holding a global conversation to agree upon a number of basic human rights. i argue that this must be the first step in the way for the occupation to create true progress. there must be an ultimate goal for which the people truly aim. there must be a concerted effort in both discernment and achievement of that goal, or else there shall not be unity at all.

Pledge or initiative?

Pledge to Support a Global Community via Participation in an Open Forum

hmm...