@almereyda Thank you for sharing especially the list of points.
I fully agree on that, and think we both have a different focus, that is important to combine. I sometimes got the impression, that we loose focus on the next steps, as we are gazing for the future or the past.
I think what you share there is really important and interesting, at the same time, I do not really know, what to do with it. I was adressed as “employer” for some times during our conversation. Which legaly I am, as well as @gandhiano is, and at the same time that is not the relationship we have.
If you want such relationship, we eather have to go full [quote=“almereyda, post:14, topic:971”]
or get focused and clear and manage some substantial fundings, which I currently do not see us capable of, as it happens, that we spend our time on antagonistic conversations (where I get to hear, that I have to overcome dual thinking, … )
or need to find occupation that is driven by someone else than us, and prove responsibility in order to keep that relationship going, that provides security and comfort of the predictable.
Currently you would have a stability of 1000€ net per month, that is already quite something, as any other contributors get less than 700€ net. It is shitty and I am happy for solutions/suggestions.
Coming to monetary flows and security, there is also a topic, that might be interesting to explore. By opening up to the community all the financial flows, and have invitive clarity, who want´s to contribute, and might also need some budget, then the number of people with budget get bigger, and the number of budget per person gets smaller, which in itself is neither good or bad, just numbers.
It is really painful to always have you complain (or maybe, that is just my impression), and not aknowledge that we do, and always will create in ambiguity.
Actually interestingly funny fact:
That “standard employment relationship” is based on a hirarchical concept and on priorities of stabilizing and growing financial flows in order to allow that stability.
The book you gave me is a really good read about apprechiate inquiry.
"vom Feindlichen zum Wertschätzenden"
I guess, that is where we are starting from : ) (ah, you told me not to put smileys, sorry…)
- wertschätzendes Zuhören (I can definitely improve on that. Sometimes I do not get the impression, that we are talking to each other, but throwing arguments at each other)
- Transformitive dialogue (having dialogues, that produces a transformation rather than having some argumentative exchange, and go on with something as before), also aknowledging the other without feeling a need to educate the person, that is coming from the stone ages (which is not… : )
- Antagonismen in Zusammenarbeit umwandeln)
(that is our currently biggest challenge!!!)
- Ambiguitäten wertschätzen
(We, or some of us, currently do not aknowledge our ambiguities, but try to eradicate them, or focus on them as something to be resolved, something that is not good, that needs to be resolved first, before anything else can happen, … let´s look at them, and learn from each outher, without the wish to change the other, but give leanway to develop)
Also thank you for the thread, I really apprechiate how many inspiring topics you bring up, and also spark some positive development of opening processes and distribute decisionmaking: Align SSEDAS and CHEST budgets