Wed 8 Aug 2012 11:14PM

"Conversation Document"

SG Scott Gregory Public Seen by 4

Scott Gregory Wed 8 Aug 2012 11:14PM

here ya go hun


Homework [requires a ratified proposal to change]
SG will try to make some protocols

sg ja

check this out:

and also this:


what do you think of this chart?:


[this whole process is like this game: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nomic]




the Agreements document - That Google Document which contains the Accepted Proposals and Unaccepted Proposals sections, available at the URL https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-cJPjO0JS-sMKwbnqQuw-pdwtKFd6yEOsGDoU2FpHxY

proposal - A string of plain text that is currently signed by at least one member.

sign (v.) - To indicate one’s good faith agreement with a proposal using the formatting protocol as described in the Accepted Proposals section of the Agreements document.

the Accepted Proposals section - the collection of proposals that have been ratified using the protocol as laid out in the Accepted Proposals section of the Agreements document.

the Unaccepted Proposals section - the collection of proposals that have been ratified using the protocol as laid out in the Accepted Proposals section of the Agreements document.

accepted proposal - A proposal that has been ratified.

unaccepted proposals - A proposal that has not been ratified.

ratified - Descriptive of a proposal that has been signed by all members in the presence of all members.

ratify (v.) - To follow the protocol described in (the Agreements document).  All members must ratify collectively.

ratify (v.) - To follow the protocol described in (the Agreements document) to formally recognize that a proposal represents an area of agreement among all members.

the Conversation document - That Google document where discussion of the Agreements document may take place, the URL of which is https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qmsGnAzN4QXNkybn9AtIYfS1cAhhdNugYdx-xYOBDGY

comments - Any string of text in the Agreements document that is not a proposal.

amendment - A proposal that is intended to alter the meaning/wording of an accepted proposal.

plain text - descriptive of strings of text that can be reproduced in their entirety in an ANSI-encoded .txt file and rendered in entirety into English speech

member - A person with the power to sign proposals in the Agreements document.

meeting - A scheduled opportunity for ratification. [A mechanism where every member is present and in each other’s continual verbal presence]


[Any time you’re in a meeting, you can always look at Protocol to see what the next step for your role for what you want to accomplish is. Instead of putting it in terms of definition, you put it in terms of, what do you want to do? here’s how you do it. It doesn’t need to cite other proposals.]


Unaccepted proposals are italicized and are followed by the initials of current signatories.

Accepted proposals are in roman (not italicized) text and do not have initials of signatories after them.

Comments are contained by square brackets (e.g., [This is a comment.]). Comments are not permitted in the Accepted Proposals section.


Write a book.


Time, date of next meeting


A member may propose a proposal. [flesh this out, indicate steps, e.g., 1. read whatever accepted proposals are relevant to see if they’re affected by your new proposal; 2. write the proposal in the Unaccepted Proposals section. This can be done at any time.

A member may sign an unaccepted proposal. This can be done at any time.

No member may change the Accepted Proposals section except in a meeting.


Scott Robert Gregory

Jesse Isaiah Arost


To comply with all the Accepted Proposals to the extent of one’s abilities.

[Failure to do so may cause someone to cease being a member and cease having the right. Duties are a protocol for determining whether or not someone is actually in their role. This is what you to do prove you are a member. If you don’t do this, you have proven you are not a member.]

proposals for agenda for july 13

agenda for july 13

discuss homework assignments

have a discussion about good faith


agenda for july 6

address pending proposals in order listed

hear from scott about what we’ll do and talk about once the protocol for organizing these meetings has been addressed to the satisfaction of both members (last 10 mins)

finish at 7:30 EST/6:30 CST


agenda for the next meeting -JA


This is a very, very preliminary, definitely incomplete list of possible areas of focus. (In fact, it’s more a list of examples of things the areas of that we might focus on than a list of those areas themselves.) Let me know if any of these interest you. I will find a way to show you my longer list sometime very soon. I’d be interested in a list like this from you (if you have/had one) just so we could, as I suggest below, start to identify some areas of mutual interest/understanding/whatever. These are all Wikipedia articles.

Note: Let me know if you want to do things in a totally different way from the ways I’ve suggested--I am up for all sorts of things.

Absentee business owner
Absentee ownership
Academic elitism
Achievement gap
Activism 2.0
Affluence in the United States
Air pollution
American middle class
American upper class
Anarchism in the United States
Anwar Awlaki
Art of memory
Basic needs
Behavioral addiction
Best practice exchange
Black feminism
Black jails
Black middle class
Black nationalism
Black Panther Party
Black Power
Black site
Bounded rationality
Category:Framing theorists
Category:Paramilitary organizations
Caucasian race
Child development
Chinese Communist Revolution
Christian right
Civilization and its discontents
Class consciousness
Codependents Anonymous
Colonial mentality
Concentration of media ownership
Condorcet method
Conservatism in the United States
Consilience (book)
Contents of the United States diplomatic cables leak
Coping (psychology)
Corporate personhood
Creativity technique
Critical race theory
Cultural hegemony
Culture of the United States
Debt relief
Developing countries' debt
Dominance and submission
Drug addiction
Dual power
Economic calculation debate
Economy of the Iroquois
Ego death
Equality of opportunity
European colonialism
Explanatory style
Expropriative anarchism
False consciousness
First Red Scare
Flow (psychology)
Food Not Bombs
Framing (social sciences)
Franchise activism
Frank Luntz
Free association (communism and anarchism)
Gated community
General knowledge
Green anarchism
Heritage Foundation
Historical materialism
Human capital
Human history
Impact and evaluation of colonialism and colonization
Inner city
Introspection illusion
Liberation theology
List of anarchist organizations
List of cognitive biases
List of environmental issues
List of intelligence agencies
List of ongoing military conflicts
Local food
Localism (politics)
Manual labour
Mara (demon)
Military Industrial Complex
Mind mapping
Mixed economy
Moral hazard
Motives for the September 11 attacks
Nation of Islam
New Deal
North American Free Trade Agreement
Nudity and sexuality
Occupation of factories
Outline of self
Permanent Autonomous Zone
Philippine%E2%80%93American War
Police officer
Political corruption
Pornography addiction
Post-left anarchy
Post-normal science
Poverty in the United States
Principal%E2%80%93agent problem
Principles of Intelligent Urbanism
Prison rape in the United States
Private property
Problem gambling
Protestant work ethic
Psychological repression
Psychological trauma
Psychosexual development
Punk subculture
Racism in the United States
Rainbow gathering
Rastafari movement
Reaction formation
Red Scare
Regulatory capture
Relaxation (psychology)
Sam Walton
Secret police
Sexual objectification
Simple living
Single-payer health care
Social class in the United States
Squatter's rights
Stereotypes of white people
Stereotypy (non-human)
Stress (biology)
Subjective well-being
Sub-Saharan Africa
Substance dependence
Sustainable living
Tea Party movement
Teenage Republicans
The Authoritarian Personality
The Establishment
The God That Failed
The Kingdom of God Is Within You
The Mass Psychology of Fascism
The Origins of Totalitarianism
The Power of Community: How Cuba Survived Peak Oil
The Society of the Spectacle
Theories of poverty
Third-wave feminism
Timeline of human prehistory
Tragedy of the commons
Trauma model of mental disorders
Unconscious mind
Uncontacted peoples
Undercover police
Undoing (psychology)
United States culture
United States diplomatic cables leak
United States incarceration rate
United States war crimes
Universal health care
Urban design
Urban renewal
Urban sprawl
Vietnam War
Vladimir lenin
War on drugs
War on Terror
What is Property%3F
What Is to Be Done%3F
What's the Matter with Kansas%3F
White Americans
White Anglo-Saxon Protestant
White people
White privilege
White trash
Wicked problems
Work aversion
Work ethic
Worker cooperative
Work-leisure dichotomy
Zapatista Army of National Liberation


So one of my motivations or interests in this project would be to put in one place all the things and notions and ideas that I have had to find for myself, piecemeal, and construct my current worldview out of. right now, e.g., there is no road from robert anton wilson straight into antiracism and antisexism. there really, really ought to be.

If we could find all those things and offer them palatably to people on reddit and in the suburbs, I’d say mission accomplished. One tricky part of such an endeavor is the impulse to overinclude certain things. in such a book, you definitely have to leave oodles of things out. that’s fine so long as we can provide references/links to them for people to investigate. one suggestion for how we might do it (this is my method, though it has mixed results) is to write/gather a lot MORE than is necessary and from this block of material carve my specific text/theory/argument. so maybe the first step would be to just agree with each other on a framework and discuss where we feel our respective areas of expertise and ignorance are so we can better be aware of them and supplement each other. maybe/maybe not we also want to include other people in this project once you and i personally have a better idea of what we’re doing.

i’d also like a focus on something like, “This is a war of the mind, of concepts and ideas. We wrote this book with the explicit hope that the ideas in it might propagate themselves to further the cause of justice and liberty.” because i really do believe that much of the game is in conservative (we’ve got to get better language than that word) hands right now for no other reason than that they own most of the major media producers in the world, and so they get to specify all the language, all the frames, etc.

we might also take a look at an anarchist faq (it’s really long) and see in what ways we DON’T want to reinvent that wheel. it is a large and sort of poorly edited but nonetheless very overall good and comprehensive work. but i feel like a lot of it needs updating and could have used peer review. a lot of it seems really clumsy and written from mostly SAWCSM perspectives.


What do you think of Reich’s suggestion that patriarchy/coercion/hierarchy came about because of a repression of sexuality? http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secB1.html#secb15

I’m not convinced it’s like 100% right, but I deeply believe SOMETHING like that must be true. What do you think?

i definitely believe babylon cripples us psychologically. there’s a pretty good amount of this particular stuff--call it like, the psychology of anarchism, or a anarchistic philosophical attitude--in robert anton wilson. he’s definitely really good at laying the soil that gives rise to anarchist-thought-yielding plants.


I haven’t figured out how to word it yet, but I vaguely desire to have a record of the original proposal and all amendments.

The reason for this is that at OccHou, we had proposals that amended proposals that amended proposals ETC. There were a couple of related problems. Sometimes we would cover the same ground multiple times, returning to version 2.0 from 5.0. I’d like to be able to see when we’re running in circles on a subject. Provided all versions are retained, there was the problem of people not being aware of the newest version. They could look at our accepted proposals and see an old version and not be bothered to pore through the rest to see if anything updated it.

SO my idea is sometihng like this

The sky is blue
The sky is blue except when clouds cover it
The sky is blue on clear days and black with bright dots on clear nights
On a clear day, the sky is blue
The blue sky should be clear
We should have meetings on clear days

I think i might just be a completionist with this, and it is not very relevant to our purposes.

please consider these concerns and respond. If you feel that these concerns are not relevant, I will most likely ratify the following:

An alternative way to propose an amendment is, within the Accepted Proposals section, to put the proposed new reading of a proposal immediately following the original proposal in italics and in some contrasting color. If the amendment is ratified, the original is to be deleted and the ratified new reading is to be de-italicized, turned the color of the rest of the Accepted Proposals section, and the initials deleted from the end. -JA

Scotty: Google keeps a record of our doc for us in all its past revisions of it. There also may be ways we can like auto-backup the doc by having a copy of it mailed to us and filed in our inboxes every day or week or whatever. Your point is good, and I don’t feel I have perfect answers to it. I just propose at least for now that we do nothing and just keep those concerns in mind. I do fear completionism, let it be said, though I am not concluded that this is a case of it. -JA

I am interested in the stuff going on below, but do not fully understand it. -JA

Spitballin here


[this is the URL of the Holy Book]
I agree to keep a copy of this document for reference
at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qmsGnAzN4QXNkybn9AtIYfS1cAhhdNugYdx-xYOBDGY/edit

If You’re reading this book, you may

continue reading this book
and if so, You may

ponder its contents
and if so, You may

find it a useful manual
In finding common ground.

If so, You may
become a MEMBER, which is a ROLE with DUTIES and BENEFITS.

If so,

must Duties for Members

Perform the DUTIES of a ROLE to the best of your ability and

Perform the DUTIES of a ROLE to the best of your ability and
or NOT

Approve the GUIDE TO ROLES on page 2 or NOT Follow principles of nonviolence while at meetin or NOT

Choose a role that suits you or NOT Start a discussion on the GUIDE TO ROLES Participate in the editing process on page 4. or NOT intervention no.1


no. 2

or NOT

If you intend to do so, you must approve the GUIDE to ROLES on page 2 of this book.

“The system works best with people in ROLES so that PROTOCOLS are more organized. These roles have associated DUTIES, POWERS, AND BENEFITS. ”

If you do not intend to do so, we ask that you follow the principles of nonviolence on page 3 for face to face interaction at our meetings
and to take good care of yourself.

PARTICIPATE in the editing process for this book that is detailed in this book,

or NOT



refer to this book as a manual when performing the DUTIES of your ROLE

[When agreements are forceful enough to dictate behavior, there will be specific duties of roles that call for coordinated action. I want the agreements to offer voluntary unconditional protocols and specific circumstantial cues for their implementation.
You agree to refer to it as a manual when performing the duties of my role.
You agree to never change it by myself or to the exclusion of any other member.
You agree to contribute to the revision of this document to reflect my feeling.

What will it look like?

Will coalitions take advantage of loners?