[Noisebridge-discuss] Structure & Membership

[Trent Robbins]

I forgot to add the second part of this passage on that ties everything
together. To have the whole context you will need to read the whole
document anyways, but I will add it here to reduce confusion:

> Although this dissection of the process of elite formation within small
groups has been critical in perspective, it is not made in the belief that
these informal structures are inevitably bad -- merely inevitable. All
groups create informal structures as a result of interaction patterns among
the members of the group. Such informal structures can do very useful
things But only Unstructured groups are totally governed by them. When
informal elites are combined with a myth of "structurelessness," there can
be no attempt to put limits on the use of power. It becomes capricious.

> This has two potentially negative consequences of which we should be
aware. The first is that the informal structure of decision-making will be
much like a sorority -- one in which people listen to others because they
like them and not because they say significant things. As long as the
movement does not do significant things this does not much matter. But if
its development is not to be arrested at this preliminary stage, it will
have to alter this trend. The second is that informal structures have no
obligation to be responsible to the group at large. Their power was not
given to them; it cannot be taken away. Their influence is not based on
what they do for the group; therefore they cannot be directly influenced by
the group. This does not necessarily make informal structures
irresponsible. Those who are concerned with maintaining their influence
will usually try to be responsible. The group simply cannot compel such
responsibility; it is dependent on the interests of the elite.

Thanks,
Trent

On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 1:48 PM Trent Robbins <robbintt at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> In the past year I have been grappling a lot with to what degree the
> membership at Noisebridge is just a board of directors with no term and a
> flexible number of seats. It makes complete sense to me that people would
> not want to burden the membership with all the implied burdens that a board
> of directors has.  Past proposals to combine the two have been scandalous
> for whatever reason; I don't know the details.
>
> One of the key documents I have been struggling with is "The Tyranny of
> Structurelessness" by Jo Freeman:
> https://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm
>
> Noisebridge is anything but a structureless organization, but there is a
> section of "The Tyranny of Structureless" that discusses how power comes to
> be that I find particularly helpful, titled *"The Nature of Elitism"*.
>
> In particular, I find this passage helpful:
>
> > These friendship groups function as networks of communication outside
> any regular channels for such communication that may have been set up by a
> group. If no channels are set up, they function as the only networks of
> communication. Because people are friends, because they usually share the
> same values and orientations, because they talk to each other socially and
> consult with each other when common decisions have to be made, the people
> involved in these networks have more power in the group than those who
> don't. And it is a rare group that does not establish some informal
> networks of communication through the friends that are made in it.
>
> > Some groups, depending on their size, may have more than one such
> informal communications network. Networks may even overlap. When only one
> such network exists, it is the elite of an otherwise Unstructured group,
> whether the participants in it want to be elitists or not. If it is the
> only such network in a Structured group it may or may not be an elite
> depending on its composition and the nature of the formal Structure. If
> there are two or more such networks of friends, they may compete for power
> within the group, thus forming factions, or one may deliberately opt out of
> the competition, leaving the other as the elite. In a Structured group, two
> or more such friendship networks usually compete with each other for formal
> power. This is often the healthiest situation, as the other members are in
> a position to arbitrate between the two competitors for power and thus to
> make demands on those to whom they give their temporary allegiance.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20180924/8acdfef0/attachment.html>