|
Got back from Portland DSA general meeting. It was good. I'll probably come back next month, and hopefully by then I'll buy a membership and join that app thing for actions and events. I found it difficult to socialize with others after the meeting though.
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 03:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 03:41 |
|
|
PDX DSA finally managed to have a successful vote that pushes our bylaw reform forward today. After the last few months of discussion, debate, and, well, drama, we're finally making headway to putting the actions of the chapter in front of the necessary bureaucratic housekeeping.punk rebel ecks posted:Portland DSA should really advertise on the site better about the time for New/Potential Member meetings. I ended showing up at the time the general meeting was supposed to occur and but was directed toward the new member meeting which was wrapping up. I initially felt foolish, but over the course of ten minutes a dozen or so people came in after me. to be honest you most likely didn't miss out on much. I attended a new member's meeting back when I first started kicking around PDX DSA and it was, uhhh, pretty uninformative. The unfortunate part of our generals is that there is typically a lot of business to cover and it can take a long time to cover it. Things like Robert's Rules, background history of the DSA/DSA PDX, the emphasis on Slack as a means of information distribution/member involvement, etc., are things that are typically learned through repeat attendance. There is a myriad of resources available to do some self-education (slack being one of the biggest ones) but to try and get all of that info into a 10-15 minute presentation that also allows for Q&A is tough. If you're a dues-paying member you can request Slack access and start digging in. If you aren't a member yet there are a few people on SA who you can DM for more of an introduction to how things work.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 03:10
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:Got back from Portland DSA general meeting. It was good. I'll probably come back next month, and hopefully by then I'll buy a membership and join that app thing for actions and events. I found it difficult to socialize with others after the meeting though. I was just gonna link you to this thread from the PNW thread but it looks like you found it after all. Don't stress about the socialization aspect. I've been digging in deeper over the last few months and I still frequently feel like a fish out of water in those environments. My advice would be to introduce yourself to a couple people at each meeting then say hi to them every time you see them afterward. That'll get the ball rolling and, once you start taking part in events/causes, you'll start meeting more and more people. I was getting flushed the first time I raised my hand at a meeting and today I was on stage addressing the entire membership 
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 03:15
|
|
|
IM DAY DAY IRL posted:PDX DSA finally managed to have a successful vote that pushes our bylaw reform forward today. After the last few months of discussion, debate, and, well, drama, we're finally making headway to putting the actions of the chapter in front of the necessary bureaucratic housekeeping. IM DAY DAY IRL posted:Don't stress about the socialization aspect. I've been digging in deeper over the last few months and I still frequently feel like a fish out of water in those environments. My advice would be to introduce yourself to a couple people at each meeting then say hi to them every time you see them afterward. That'll get the ball rolling and, once you start taking part in events/causes, you'll start meeting more and more people. I was getting flushed the first time I raised my hand at a meeting and today I was on stage addressing the entire membership EDIT - You were on stage? Mind if I ask which person you were?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 03:28
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:That poo poo was intense. People were REALLY concerned about "reasonable chances of winning". Fun Fact: The debate you're referencing had nothing to do with the bylaws. That was only for our formal candidate endorsement requirements. Robert's Rules/parliamentary procedure can be incredibly obtuse and confusing for those not versed or familiar with the quirks of how it should be implemented. One of the good aspects of it is that the chapter can modify proposals on the fly- striking that line from the proposed requirements helped get the vote to a unanimous yes. It can seem petty or silly to quibble over small details like that but if 5-15 minutes of debate can put an issue to rest that otherwise could potentially create literal hours of painstaking bullshit (or, worst case, disbanding of the chapter) down the road. This is also why things like having strict guidelines on if/how/when members or Steering Committee members may be expelled is important. Most of the questions that I presented during the debates on the bylaws were not so much for my benefit, they were more to show the amount of work that had been put in by the bylaw reform committee to ensure that things were as airtight as possible. The attention to detail that PDX DSA has shown over the last few months may be dull but reflects the professionalism and actual representation of the members, in my opinion. mods please rename thread to "DSA: I was the bearded white guy" i was the guy speaking about the steering committee nomination/election process IM DAY DAY IRL has issued a correction as of 05:28 on Jan 29, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 05:17
|
|
|
My father has given me a great gift. A weapon in my ongoing battle against the bosses and their running dogs on the City Council. I will be come the only thing they respect, the only thing they fear: a white man who has memorized Robert's Rules of Order and does not take ordinary social cues.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 05:31
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/SanAntonioDSA/status/957820533936140288 Didn't know this about this dude. p cool btw the incumbent Republican is not running
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 05:35
|
|
|
IM DAY DAY IRL posted:Fun Fact: The debate you're referencing had nothing to do with the bylaws. That was only for our formal candidate endorsement requirements. Good point. IM DAY DAY IRL posted:mods please rename thread to "DSA: I was the bearded white guy" I feel like I was the only non-white person there. Not sure if that's more so due to the DSA or Portland.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 06:15
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:I feel like I was the only non-white person there. Not sure if that's more so due to the DSA or Portland. Both. Portland is ~72% white and I'd imagine that the demographics for the current DSA attendees put that percentage even higher. From the start of my involvement there hasn't been much base-building activity; members are present in a large portion of PDX activism but rarely table/canvas for the DSA in a general sense. We've got some awareness/community service programs in the works (including successful national campaigns like brake light repair clinics) but still clearly have a lot of work to do if we want to materialize the inclusivity that we work toward. You heard some of the Bylaw Reform committee talk about the org's dedication to equitable representation on the new Steering Committee. We've put measures in place to support minority and marginalized groups throughout the chapter, now we've got to figure out how to get people in the door in the first place. I don't have much experience with the membership working group (I just joined the slack channel yesterday after someone referenced me there) but that could be a great place to get involved, if one was interested.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 06:49
|
|
|
IM DAY DAY IRL posted:Both. Portland is ~72% white and I'd imagine that the demographics for the current DSA attendees put that percentage even higher. From the start of my involvement there hasn't been much base-building activity; members are present in a large portion of PDX activism but rarely table/canvas for the DSA in a general sense. We've got some awareness/community service programs in the works (including successful national campaigns like brake light repair clinics) but still clearly have a lot of work to do if we want to materialize the inclusivity that we work toward. I see. Can I still sign up for Portland DSA and use SLACK if I have a billing address for my card tied to Wisconsin? Also, I heard that these socialist organizations tend to be filled with mostly upper middle to upper class people, rather than working or even the middle class. Is that accurate for Portland DSA?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 08:05
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:Can I still sign up for Portland DSA and use SLACK if I have a billing address for my card tied to Wisconsin? I believe so, yeah. When you get your national membership you enter your physical address and should be added to our roster. I'd recommend bringing your membership card/have your confirmation email ready to show at check-in; our rosters are usually a month or two behind. punk rebel ecks posted:Also, I heard that these socialist organizations tend to be filled with mostly upper middle to upper class people, rather than working or even the middle class. Is that accurate for Portland DSA? Did you miss the part during today's meeting when we literally unanimously voted to start a "Tax the Rich" campaign? 😂 I can't really speak to the demographics of the chapter, because we don't collect that data, but I do feel confident saying that is not remotely the case with regard to the Portland chapter. That being said, if someone self-identifies as a socialist and is willing to support, fund, and mobilize on initiatives to better the lives of those who need it (especially the working class, houseless, etc.) I'm not going to be picky over how much they've got in their IRA.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 08:59
|
|
|
IM DAY DAY IRL posted:Did you miss the part during today's meeting when we literally unanimously voted to start a "Tax the Rich" campaign? 😂 Yeah that's what I thought. It's just that I often hear from people that there aren't that many working class people in these types of organizations. Speaking of voting, I certainly see the benefit of in-person public voting, but I feel that it could lead to some unrepresented results as some people would be too afraid to vote "yay" or "nay" on some positions that seem unpopular with the others at the meeting.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 09:21
|
|
|
I believe there's an advanced Robert's Rules of Order move you can do to force a vote to be secret ballot, but in theory, most votes are by raising a hand or a placard or something because there are so many of them and doing secret ballot by default would take a long-rear end time. Also, Robert's Rules of Order is also applied in situations where the members of the group are representing members of a larger group, in which case it makes ethical sense that their positions be public and known to the people they're presenting. But that's more explaining why this is the default than explaining why it should be the default here. In any case, if there's anything Robert's Rules should give you, it's confidence in having opinions everyone else hates.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 13:20
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:Also, I heard that these socialist organizations tend to be filled with mostly upper middle to upper class people, rather than working or even the middle class. Is that accurate for Portland DSA? I mean, at the moment, a lot of the middle class and above jokers have regular schedules, so I could see that as a thing. I remember retail work and getting called in 30 minutes before things started and all that associated bullshit when I was younger. I feel that's kind of a thing that we need to fight for in our state/local governments.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 15:30
|
|
|
.
Karl Barks has issued a correction as of 05:26 on Jan 30, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 15:52
|
|
|
Frijolero posted:https://twitter.com/SanAntonioDSA/status/957820533936140288 deleted~ I looked at the account. Was this about Derrick Crowe getting endorsed? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 17:46
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:Yeah that's what I thought. It's just that I often hear from people that there aren't that many working class people in these types of organizations. my branch had the same problem wherein a group of ~100 only 4-5 said they didn't have a college degree and around the same had ever been in a union. it's definitely a problem in a lot of leftist groups, IWW aside, and one not as glaringly apparent as like being able to look around and see only 2 poc in the crowd.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 17:59
|
|
|
I'm about to pull the trigger on signing up for the Boston chapter, any regulars have advice on how/where to get started? Edit: after signing up online, of course. I figured that part out, heh.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 18:08
|
|
|
Ruzihm posted:deleted~ Yessir
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 18:27
|
|
|
Axe Master posted:I'm about to pull the trigger on signing up for the Boston chapter, any regulars have advice on how/where to get started? show up to something, that's literally it, if you want a quick primer on socialism the abcs of socialism is available in PDF format for free online
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 18:36
|
|
|
sign up with a smaller group that interests you, thats where you'll get most info about fun parties
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 19:34
|
|
|
Axe Master posted:I'm about to pull the trigger on signing up for the Boston chapter, any regulars have advice on how/where to get started? lots of chapters have new member orientations or meet & greets, i'd look around their social media (or better out, reach out to them) and see if they have any events like this coming up
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 19:38
|
|
|
Yeah and later you can upgrade into infiltrating TPUSA's diaper conferences https://medium.com/@AaronWaxing/a-california-commie-in-charlie-kirks-court-e4183ab3411a
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 19:39
|
|
|
Vhak lord of hate posted:my branch had the same problem wherein a group of ~100 only 4-5 said they didn't have a college degree and around the same had ever been in a union. it's definitely a problem in a lot of leftist groups, IWW aside, and one not as glaringly apparent as like being able to look around and see only 2 poc in the crowd. I wonder why this is?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 19:53
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:I wonder why this is? If I had joined three years ago I could have never gone to a general meeting because I worked noon to midnight at a coffee shop, it was addressed earlier but if you don't have an office job getting to meetings might be difficult. Leftist orgs have a rep for being book clubs, not entirely unfounded since ISO and SAlt have required reading lists. Not every branch offers child minding services for meetings and babysitters are expensive. Does the DSA walk the walk in regards to labor? There's a lot of reasons; my branch is trying to do outreach by showing up at picket lines, offering child services for meetings, having a labor group. The same methods as attracting any group to DSA. I think/hope it's working but if a construction worker decides he doesn't need to be part of his union, IWW, AND DSA I don't think that's a huge issue.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 20:16
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:I wonder why this is? Hierarchy of needs, IMO. Any union-focused org (like IWW) is going to inherently be a better option for those in union jobs and for the rest it may be difficult to justify spending anywhere from 2 to 4 hours a month in the middle of a weekend day to listen to recaps on local activism. Recently PDX has taken measures to try and localize a little more throughout town; there are separate "quadrant" groups set up that will hopefully allow for more engagement, action, and local attenton through neighborhood initiatives. Theoretically this would allow people to engage without having to commit time to the overall housekeeping of the org but you still need to get them in the door, get them acclimated with Slack (which can be a huge issue for those who aren't tech savvy), and available during turnout.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 20:17
|
|
|
Axe Master posted:I'm about to pull the trigger on signing up for the Boston chapter, any regulars have advice on how/where to get started? Boston has general meetings once a month and at the end they almost always do a little bit for new people where everyone from the various working groups introduces themselves and mentions what group they're in. My advice is to show up to one of the general meetings and then try and get involved with one or more of the working groups that interest you. Their facebook page tends to be pretty well updated on most of their events, the next general meeting is February 24th.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 21:35
|
|
|
Ruzihm posted:deleted~ derrick is good people, got arrested with him back in july (going to my next court date tomorrow, ugh) and was super stoked to hear DSASA endorsed him.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2018 21:49
|
|
|
our chapter's secretary and another labor activist from YALL got interviewed by Rag Radio about our health justice working group.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 21:52
|
|
|
Syndlig posted:our chapter's secretary and another labor activist from YALL got interviewed by Rag Radio about our health justice working group. Good stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 22:53
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:That poo poo was intense. People were REALLY concerned about "reasonable chances of winning". tbf that is a standard centrist excuse for not running progressives so i can see why they'd be worried
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 23:53
|
|
|
Yinlock posted:tbf that is a standard centrist excuse for not running progressives so i can see why they'd be worried I was pretty surprised that, A. it was included in the first place, and B. there were ~20 people who voted against removing it from the proposition. When someone said something along the lines of "I don't want to run in races I can't win" I nearly laughed out loud.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 00:13
|
|
|
IM DAY DAY IRL posted:I was pretty surprised that, A. it was included in the first place, and B. there were ~20 people who voted against removing it from the proposition. I was going to speak up in the discussion that the term "reasonable" chances is far too vague. Define "reasonable chance"? I agree that if one wouldn't support a candidate like Bernie who was pulling in double digit numbers is idiotic. However, it seems far more reasonable when bringing up supporting ultra niche candidates like Gloria La Riva. While we can laugh at centrists all day at their losing triangulation strategy, there is still some sort of spectrum where electability chances matters.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 00:30
|
|
|
Yeah, I dunno about that. I was going to chime in on the issue but had already flapped my gums so much that I figured I'd be better off letting things play out and simply make my voice heard with my vote. What I would have brought up is that the criteria for candidate endorsement was already pretty thorny and that if someone met all of the criteria and cleared the 2/3rds vote then I don't really give a poo poo about how "viable" they are as a candidate. If someone explicitly states, on the record, that they're going to support socialist ideology and are in line with the org's values and initiatives then give them the endorsement. What are we afraid of, losing an election on a city, county, or state level? We're already doing that every time they're held in the absence of a progressive candidate. Better to throw weight behind a candidate who represents us than try to get centrists or corporate shills to concede their platform in favor of ours. If members don't like an endorsed candidate they don't have to volunteer to canvass, phone bank, or even vote for 'em. gently caress. I think I just joined the reformation caucus
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 01:00
|
|
|
Does here anyone know anything about the Brooklyn/NYC chapter? I have a friend who lives in Brooklyn lamenting about feeling helpless politically in today’s climate, and I thought I’d recommend their local chapter, but I didn’t want to do it if it’s an East Bay type situation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 01:27
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:I was going to speak up in the discussion that the term "reasonable" chances is far too vague. Define "reasonable chance"? I agree that if one wouldn't support a candidate like Bernie who was pulling in double digit numbers is idiotic. However, it seems far more reasonable when bringing up supporting ultra niche candidates like Gloria La Riva. i think the main rule to keep in mind is "don't pre-emptively asses a candidate's electability" like how dems decide beforehand how their candidates will do and their monocles fly off when they eat poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 01:58
|
|
|
HMS Beagle posted:Does here anyone know anything about the Brooklyn/NYC chapter? I have a friend who lives in Brooklyn lamenting about feeling helpless politically in today’s climate, and I thought I’d recommend their local chapter, but I didn’t want to do it if it’s an East Bay type situation. it's good, they should sign up and turn out, there's SO many things going on in the city. I'm in the Bronx/Uptown Manhattan branch and we are chock full of good people (particularly the ones who organize/show up outside of branch meetings). I haven't had much interaction with Brooklyn but I am working with a member of their housing group to arrange for a new collaboration deal with a local non-profit for tenants' associations. She is also cool.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 02:01
|
|
|
IM DAY DAY IRL posted:Yeah, I dunno about that. I was going to chime in on the issue but had already flapped my gums so much that I figured I'd be better off letting things play out and simply make my voice heard with my vote. What I would have brought up is that the criteria for candidate endorsement was already pretty thorny and that if someone met all of the criteria and cleared the 2/3rds vote then I don't really give a poo poo about how "viable" they are as a candidate. If someone explicitly states, on the record, that they're going to support socialist ideology and are in line with the org's values and initiatives then give them the endorsement. What are we afraid of, losing an election on a city, county, or state level? We're already doing that every time they're held in the absence of a progressive candidate. Better to throw weight behind a candidate who represents us than try to get centrists or corporate shills to concede their platform in favor of ours. If members don't like an endorsed candidate they don't have to volunteer to canvass, phone bank, or even vote for 'em.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 02:13
|
|
|
achillesforever6 posted:When the PGH Chapter had an endorsement meeting with potential candidates, we only endorsed 2 because of factors like: they were the only DSA members looking to run, there were some reservations with a few of the candidates with their lack of socialist values, and the major one imo was that we didn't want to be spread too thin endorsing a bunch of people especially since some were running for statewide positions. From what I've heard/read PDX is making some pretty big hurdles for candidates to clear before they're even presented to the chapter for the vote. One thing to keep in mind is that candidate eligibility is certainly an argument that would be welcome within debate prior to a chapter vote. I just personally think including unquantifiable metrics in the endorsement policy "must haves" is too messy and prone to exploitation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 02:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 03:41 |
|
|
HMS Beagle posted:Does here anyone know anything about the Brooklyn/NYC chapter? I have a friend who lives in Brooklyn lamenting about feeling helpless politically in today’s climate, and I thought I’d recommend their local chapter, but I didn’t want to do it if it’s an East Bay type situation. It's very good and they should come check it out. They unfortunately just missed the general meeting this evening. Like the BUM said, there's a ton going on in a lot of great areas. There's a bi-weekly night school going on for the more theory-minded, too. The mobilizer setup they use is handy for bringing new people in. If they want a hook up to their neighborhood mobilizer, let me know (or if they have any specific questions, I'm happy to answer what I can! Grad school has taken me away from going to as many actions as I wish I could, but I try to stay on top.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 07:13
|
|
