 Hello, hello, and Scott somewhere, it's one past. Good morning, did you lose Jerry? I wasn't shown up yet. Hmm, it's a very quiet group here. Welcome to our Thursday meditation center, where let's go. Well, Doug, I think we're finally kicking off this, this audacious undertaking that you have been pushing us towards. Well, that sounds good. Yeah, we had, we're actually having meetings to, to set up an organizational construct that will allow us to move forward with it. While we're waiting for Jerry, I asked maybe a question of the people already here to kind of introduce themselves in two sentences. So, but that's impossible, of course, to tell who you are in two sentences, but to kind of get an idea if that feels like something you want to do. Well, you're raising the question speaks to a need. So, okay, I'm going to jump in. Mike, I come from a psychoanalytic background. I studied with Eric from Eric Eric since the other time has come to put society on the couch. I like that. My focus is on what I'm calling garden world politics. That is the way to get to the future is to push issues together and work them simultaneously. So that gardening, that is the making of food and habitat, want to be in the same place like the Italian hill towns. It's good for children. It's good for pets. It's good for old people. And it's an attractive vision. Whether we actually have a space in the future to get there or not is the question. I think we're swamped by the tendency towards a high tech future to try and manage everything in an algorithmic way. I don't think it's going to work. But I think we need to engage our imagination. So I think what I'm really doing is trying to keep the imagination alive and trying for possibilities. Bentley, are you unmuted? Did you want to go next? Uh, I can. So, Bentley Davis, the software engineer currently experimenting with a project called Gullibot, which helps society make decisions based on evidence in a non-combative way. And I also started an OGME project where I were crowdfunding an open source way for people to look at their Zoom chats a little easier. So it just takes the blob of text they give you and formats it in a nice way. So I could put links to that stuff in the in the matter most. Okay, I was going to go next. Thanks. Okay. Yeah, I'm a retired food service professional and have spent the last 10 years since my retirement to try to alert everyone that we're about running out of time to to call food because the way we're calling food is destroying the environment and is destroying the very foundation for what it takes to call food. And we're finally reaching the point where this is becoming obvious to everyone because we are, we have already lost 40% of our top soil, you know, we're polluting our waters and we're diminishing biodiversity that is necessary to sustain life itself. So I'm a core team member for the Sierra Club, food and acting, Crassoids Network. I'm working with Citizen Climate Lobby and Business Climate Leader as as a sector leader, agriculture. And then I finally got that entire core focused on food because it's clear that the IPCC targets cannot be met without fixing food. It's if you if you stop the emissions today from fossil fuel consumption in transportation and the energy sector, it wouldn't matter. Food alone would push us beyond the two decreased Celsius. So, so now there is a very energized team, they're doing better than us. We are engaging over 200,000 citizen volunteers, you know, to talk to members of Congress, to meet, we just pushed the Core and Climate Solutions Act, so when we're working on other pieces of legislation, not to to to get going. And here with OGM, we just agreed on setting up a very audacious plan to to develop a support structure to assist communities to to secure their food supply, because at this point in time, I mean, if you look around globally, we are we are already in a close to runaway change in climate. Basically, what what has happened is that the that the Arctic ice fields that the Arctic ice fields have shrunk to the point where they where they no longer have the capacity to energize the Gulf Stream. So the ocean currents and the air streams that have regulated our climate for thousands of years, millions of years, most likely, are too weak now to to to keep with patterns in place and move them around in time, which is why they are arrested in place. And at the same time, the air is holding so much more water because the climate is already heated up. So you see these massive rainfalls coming down because there's just so much more moisture inside the air. And all of that means that our food supply is completely at risk. And so as a community, you have to protect yourself and you have to start alerting communities that they need to take ownership of their own ecosystem and their own environment. So that's what we're trying to do to set up a team to to pay attention to that, but then also function as an innovations, or courage to connect needs is support to set up a platform where we can assist the community to identify its needs and then connect it with resources that can match that. Thanks. It's really helpful for me, but I'm not sure how it is for the rest of the call. I asked for introductions. And it's I like really hearing what people do as a fundamental tribe or something. So unless somebody else wants to do something until Jerry might come to the call. I like continuing if you have an objection, please let me know. Okay, Michael. I'll do an introduction too, but I actually did have a question for class. Maybe we can circle back to it. I don't know where we are in the introduction process because I got here a little bit late. Well, let me ask my question for class. Just the you know, the bullet point of if the carbon emissions from the energy sector and fossil fuels, etc. disappeared. Food systems would still be at issue. Is the opposite also true? I mean, do you know, is food enough by itself if carbon emissions and you know, emissions from the energy sector were sorry, not carbon emissions. Fossil fuel related and energy related carbon emissions were eliminated but were not eliminated and the food system was. Yeah, I think I understand where you're trying to go. The position we're in today is there's too much CO2 in the atmosphere if we have to pull it down. And then there are these hairpins ideas. And I mean, I've been listening to presentations of people coming up with schemes to sequester carbon out of the atmosphere with high tech solutions. It's completely insane. I mean, it's just on the surface insane, right? Because you can continue what we're doing and continuing the damage we're doing and then trying to have a big suction machine somewhere to pull that stuff back out and we have to stop what we're doing. And then go carbon negative at the same time. And the only place to do that is via photosynthesis. And photosynthesis starts with agriculture, right? Because the plants sequester carbon out of the atmosphere and put it into the soil. There's two to three times more carbon in the soil than there is in the atmosphere. So the but the way we're farming actually releases carbon, right? Because we are we're killing the microbiome inside the soil by putting chemicals into it. Since they're dignitarism. I guess my question class though is what we're doing in farming and agriculture and food. It's not a carbon negative process. It should be. It's creating carbon. How does it compare with the carbon? Is it itself a greater emitter of carbon than fossil fuels say or buildings or energy? So I don't have that number in my head. I don't know if the total volume on the per ton basis of of the food system equals that of the energy system. What I do know when there are articles there, science papers out there is that if we continue to farm the way we do, we will release enough carbon to push us beyond the two degrees. Right. Okay. I mean, yeah, I guess just in terms of, I mean, from coming from a media side, and I'll get into my introduction, my background, hi, I'm Michael Grossman. And my background is in media. I spent my first career in magazine and newspaper making back when that was a thing. And I then moved into consulting mostly for the same clients, but mostly on the case of helping them make the transition into the digital sphere as opposed to, you know, keeping on going with print. And in the last few years, I've been working on a project called Factor that is a knowledge sharing, knowledge publishing, organizing platform that, you know, has a lot in common with OGM, which is what got me here. And, you know, I'm involved with a lot of similarly focused entities who are trying to figure out how to interoperate, how to figure out business models that, you know, benefit. I mean, the basic thing about that we have in common is not being ad supported, not being attention sucking, but rather being, you know, working for our members as opposed to working for advertisers. But to get back around close to my question is the storytelling around this thing and the easy bullet points, you know, getting people to do something, you know, everybody likes to point to the change to more people doing, you know, separating their recycling or more people choosing to pay a little more to eat organic as things that were stories told rightly or wrongly in the marketplace that changed mass behavior to some degree. And so the storytelling about what individuals can do is really important and prioritizing, if we want them to prioritize dealing with the food system as opposed to what they think, you know, I should buy carbon offsets when I take an airplane if they can, or people who can afford to do that, or, you know, I shouldn't use my car so much, you know, people get that a little more easily, but if it's not the priority changing the priority, or if it's an equal priority, fine, but I'm just trying to get at the storytelling and the numbers and, and I think it's a powerful statement to say that if you deal with this alone, that's not enough. But just want to know the proportion, I mean, I think it would help the storytelling to know the proportion and also in that the food system, you're talking about this overall effect of the food system, I'm sure people are going to wonder, are we talking about, you know, livestock methane, are we talking about, you know, what proportion of the different things that are created by the food system are at issue? If I understand you correctly, you're kind of asking what is the story behind it, backed up with facts, how does it, and how do you then communicate it to the general audience? Is that kind of what you're trying to figure out? Yeah, I mean, I guess, you know, my, my take is, okay, how do we, how do we motivate a general audience? I think one of the things that OGM is all about is like, how do we bring together the big thinkers who, you know, have answers and want to set priorities? But my thing is more like, okay, this is interesting, how do we bring it to general knowledge? How do I talk to my, like, editor friends and, you know, folks like that who will tell this story better with some bullet points? Yeah, I think we're way, way beyond tinkering on the edges, right? Greta Stunberg, summed it up, is the house is on fire, I want you to panic, right? We are really at the moment in time where we need to panic and to tell people that maybe you should eat less meat or separate your trash, it's just not going to get us anywhere. I mean, truly, we have to truly find a way to convey to people the seriousness of the situation we're in and at the same time, provide them with ways to do something about it, which is at the community level, right? Because when you're talking about separating trash, that's abstract, but when we're talking about our water here, our little river running through our cities at risk because, right, and here's what we need to do. I think we're really at this current level of granularity where we have to engage at community level. We could continue on this discussion. I wonder what to do. Either we continue also on giving introductions first and then going, continuing with the discussion, but then it's me determining. Well, I apologize for breaking the... No, that's fine. I just know where we were in the introduction. It's kind of what we very often do too. Yeah. Maybe let David go next. He's in the food business. Okay, cool. David. He? Oh, because I'm not in the food business. You're in the food business. I'm Dave Woodsall. I'm actually sitting in rural Vermont right now, but I'm usually in Oakland, California. And I find this conversation really interesting. I've been kind of in where my head's been spending over the last decade or so, I suppose. And I can give you my quick take on it, which is I'm spending most of my time coordinating a group called the Global Regeneration CoLab that has some familiarity with the OGM. I think we did 250 Zoom calls last year and active Slack discussion. And the conceit is it's change makers helping change makers create a regenerative future. And I went to the regenerative future concept in part to get away from the scare mongering of climate change. And it may well be that climate change is going to ruin us all, but I don't see it as activating people to act. We've been trying to do it for a couple of decades. In fact, I think it's gotten worse, not better, right? And so in some sense, we've created this catastrophe. The idea of panic doesn't seem like a constructive response. So what do you do? My theory is, well, you shift away from focusing on the panic, shift to something positive and optimistic, right? Something that we want to have happen. I'm going to call that regeneration or regenerative future. And you try to help people create that good thing, right? That good thing gets rid of the bad things, right? As a byproduct. But climate change is, you know, it's a byproduct of a broken economic system, right? So it's biodiversity loss. So it is malnutrition. So, you know, there's a whole bunch of things that are that are symptomatic of a broken system. What we need is a better system. And so how do we, how do we motivate that better system? And, you know, so Michael, we've been, you know, like the storytelling piece of it seems really critical. And we've been looking at like solar punk as kind of a model for what this better world looks like, you know, which tends to be, you know, like lots of solar panels and people floating around in blimps and, you know, everybody has a strawberry garden and, you know, but, but it is this visioning of a world that we could have if we only worked towards it. And so anyway, so the global regeneration collab is supposed to help people who are helping to create this new world is kind of the change concept. Okay. And that's, that's the main thing you're doing, David. That's what your life is about in the back. Yeah. Okay. Thank you, David. Yeah. And I just one more comment on that. And I'd be curious if anybody has a reaction. Part of that is I've been trying to figure out how to conceptualize it. And one of the things I've been was reacting to somebody talking about wicked problems the other day. And I, my theory is actually focusing on problems as part of the problem. Because when you do that, you end up with zero some outcomes, you end up with fear, you end up with blame, you end up with a lot of non-constructive things you activate the wrong part of the brain in some sense. So what we want to focus on instead is opportunities or possibilities or pentatiality something something optimistic as opposed to pessimistic. So anyway, I don't know if that resonates with anybody, but be curious. Thank you. Thank you, David. And I saw Doug wanted to say something, but then I prefer to first go to the introductions and then continue the discussion after we had the introductions. But that's my preference. If Simon would like to go next and then I go to Doug after we finish the introductions. Hi. I think I'm in the right place. You seem to have guys providing all the support. I've got the need. I stumbled across this group through Vincent Arena that I suspect most of you know and the Trove platform. I'm working on something in partnership with Vincent, which is called the chrysalis community. Chrysalis being a metaphor for transformation. The caterpillar instinctively knows when to stop eating everything and consuming it everything. And then it moves into the space, which is the chrysalis and transforms into something else. Humanity 2.0, if you like. So the platform is inspired by a quote by somebody you may all know, Anna Lupe, an American food advocate, which is every time you spend money, you're casting a vote for the kind of road you want. So the whole idea in combination with Vincent is to create a portfolio of local projects and good causes, where by local businesses agree to make a donation to the product of the shopper's choosing every time they make a purchase. So it engage and it will own that particular directory will only be local small independent businesses. So it's all about driving things back down to the local level. And ultimately it's about hauling out capitalism, but by stealth. Because it's been identified, people are just so locked into it, they don't know how to break free. When you're focusing on how to put any food on the table, whether it's sustainable or not, is kind of not important in the moment. So it has to be over across a period of time that you make the change rapidly, class absolutely, but still you need to do something, otherwise you won't do nothing. So that's the idea. John, would you like to go next? Okay. Wow. I have worked for maybe 20 different entities in my career. There are different names. You could say what I was doing. A lot of it would fit under the umbrella of teacher. From the perspective of open global mind, we might say, well really you were the kind of teacher you were trying to be was a sense maker. And that's true. I was trying to be a sense maker. I was trying to write that a shared perception of reality. And this does sound like a group I would be wanting to join if I wasn't already in it. But among the things that people are saying here, there's a kind of a continuum. And there's a fertile ground, I think somewhere between tolerance and consensus that we're looking for. We need to be more than tolerating each other. And we don't need to completely agree with each other. In fact, we need to appreciate that we're not going to agree with each other and that that shouldn't be the barrier to going ahead. I accept the urgency. Klaus and Doug and several other people, they're like, wow, it really is, the house really is on fire. I don't want to make anyone comfortable, quote unquote, comfortable, just recycling or eating less meat. But I do want to have a soft ramp. I want to have a way to get people engaged and urge them along. And I'm recognizing that some of them are going to be engaged in something that may, in scientific terms, be mostly ritual and not effective. And the real question is, does it move them along the continuum? Does it make them part of a community that is accelerating towards the more comprehensive kinds of solutions that we might be talking about? And I agree, agriculture is way up there, both whether it equals fossil food or not fossil fuels or not. It's the point is that it's something many, many more people in the world can, should and do. We're much closer to our food or we ought to be much closer to our food and we could be. It's harder for us to get closer to something that makes the vehicle go that we ride on. We should be there too, but we're not, you know, we're not wind capturing and solar capturing, but we can be food growing and we should. That's my end. And John, is your audience over your life, has it been very broad kind of people you were talking to, if you say 20 different instances? I started out teaching, I started on the teacher core in Detroit and it was mainly like survive, like make it through the day and keep people from killing each other right in front of you. And it moved on to teaching in a more relaxed high school setting and then teaching teachers and then college teaching very, very weak first generation college students and it moved into consulting. And again, it's the complexity of what I was trying to teach increased and the appreciation for the fact that there was this very complicated dance with tolerance, difference, enthusiasm, engagement that that was that current was dominant, it was equal to or dominating the subject matter. You know, and then if I didn't want to, if I didn't figure out how to address that, it wouldn't matter about the relevance or accuracy of what I was trying to teach. That makes sense. Yes. And it means a lot of different things I imagine. I think plenty of room to expand on that. But thank you, John. Maybe I'd be happy to expand later, but you know, let's go through the process. Scott, would you like to introduce yourself? Sure. I'm the low man on the totem pole in the sense of great visions for the future. Mine tend to be with the simple side of things. How can I help people who are not exposed to some of these ideas find ways in that are simple and especially children? But I do know most of my adult friends are not having conversations about anything like this. Their conversations about food are what are we going to have for dinner? And we're out of milk. You know, that's it. So I'm recently certified in systems thinking from the Cabrera Research Lab. Most of the people in that cohort were, I would consider higher level in their careers. They were looking at solving wicked problems, big problems, both inside their corporations and or inside their organizations or inter-organizationally. And I'm trying to help regular people understand the fundamental rules of thinking. Just here they are. Here's some simple tools and getting people to even take that first step is something that most people don't cross that threshold. They think, but they don't ever go meta on their thinking. And it doesn't take a lot, but that's the area where I tend to like to play. Instead of, I don't know, I feel like I'm more at the parts level than the whole level, if that makes any sense. My background is in graphic design, copywriting. And I am known for taking complicated things and simplifying them in a way that has people around the room saying, yeah, that was what I was trying to say. So that's where I am. Thanks, Scott. Kevin, would you mind introducing yourself? We don't have cherry today on the call yet. I'm Kevin Jones. I'm a serial entrepreneur. I've been in this group knows I've been working on this fund to provide friends and family funding to black and brown entrepreneurs who don't have a rich uncle. And anyway, the checks are going out next week. We've actually done it. And we're also looking to replicate in a couple of places. And we're discovering what works and doesn't. So that's what I am. Cool. Thank you. And then maybe I can introduce myself. I've been thinking about like this meta project starting from, okay, there's so many solutions out there already, how could we connect them and build a platform that just shows all the solutions to really thinking really broadly about, okay, what are all the possible collaboration tools and how could we build an online platform where people can work together on building on knowledge, not just sharing it, but also building on it and how to, yeah, what's like an effective way to make people work together. One of the first iterations was kind of building an online event platform for workshops, event conferences, projects, where it's just about events. So a date and a description of an event and then based on the different methodologies that people use. So like a social change calendar. And then I wrote this proposal for the global challenges foundation. And then I found out, okay, I actually also want to create kind of a meta network on social change. And I understood like, okay, meta is different than what people are used to. So I'm doing something weird so people will have all these objections. But then I understood, yeah, but this is actually where it matters. We need to go meta, we need to go larger scale, and it's just another way of thinking. I don't need to solve all the problems. I want to create the tools that help other people solve problems. And I think Vincent Darvinia is kind of closest in building a prototype on what I wanted in terms of online platform. And I'm also really interested in how to build this kind of meta network where it becomes more effective on, yeah, all these kind of different actors with very different ways of thinking working together. How might that work? Most effectively. And what kind of networks do we need? What kind of topics do we need to focus on? One of the topics I'm really interested in is ethical power. Like if you go to sociocracy or nonviolent communication or transparency international or people dealing with nonviolent ways of dealing with conflict, it's all, it's about transforming the way we deal with power. And that's one of one of the key issues that I think about. And then there is, I guess, Matt? Anyhow, that's Vincent. Hey, Jerry's not there. And I propose to do a round of introductions. I don't know if you know everyone in the call. Otherwise, maybe it's nice to have an introduction from you as well. Oh, man, I'm being put on the spot. Sure. I think I know everyone, almost everyone here. Nice to see you, Scott. It's been a little while. Hey, guys. My name is Vincent. I'm from Long Island. I've been working on a platform called Trove to help catalyze action and connect people around what matters most projects and events and different initiatives around social impact. Lately, I've been working on kind of like syncing up and connecting a few different tools for doing matchmaking and connecting in databases. It's summer here. I'm probably going to go for a walk during the rest of the call. Get a little break from screens. By the time Thursday comes, that's like typically how I'm feeling. But yeah, I don't know how much longer the intro's you guys are doing, but nice to be here. It's been a while. It took a little kind of break from these calls because I was just swamped. Thank you, Vincent. And I guess after this, Doug, I remember that you had like a comment on the discussion we had before. Maybe let's continue there. Yeah, and now try and keep it short. It seems to me that our focus tends to be either on the individual and local level or on the societal level. My view is the real power in society is in the intermediate organizations, in particular corporations. They're highly defended and impervious to social input. And so long as that continues, we're not going to get anywhere on the climate issues. So the question is, what's the work around? Because clearly, particularly whether that's the food business or the energy business, I think the food business is heavily defended by corporate interests, as is the energy sector. It's just not as obvious, right? But when you look at the concentration in the food business where you have maybe 10 companies, basically dominate 80% of the entire food supply in a vertically integrated supply chain from Monsanto and Tyson and Cargill and Nestle and so on all the way into the retail sector, that is a machine that is extremely difficult to change. And in particular, because of their perceived efficiency, this vertical integration has created a perceived efficiency, they are unable to really change. So if you are telling McDonald's to source local fresh food, it's impossible that there isn't a knife in the kitchen to slice a tomato with. It's basically, it's an assembly line kitchen that works with refabricated products coming in. So to change that, you have to work around it and it has to start local. So I mean, the local empowerment is in my mind the only way that you can break this corporate stranglehold. I could say so many things, but whenever I'm on these calls, I notice that this is the level to tackle the issue. But then I noticed, yeah, but isn't it all the levels? Like there's a leadership of these corporations, they are kind of probably in organizations like the Lions Club and Rotary where they connect. And there's all these kind of leadership organizations where people could be reached with short ends organizations, then there's trade organizations where they're in, there's all kinds of platforms where you could reach these corporations. And you can also reach them by the end of the cycle where it's the consumers and the people selling the stuff. So I wonder, there's, I guess there's people working on all levels, right? NGOs working on all these different levels. So I'm so curious, like, I don't know what the question is behind it. How do you deal with it as OGM maybe? I'm not sure. What is our, what is our job or something? I don't know. But Kevin, say something. Yeah. Yeah, Kevin. Yeah, I wanted to just, I think that's an interesting critique. And I think it's right. I see this group coming up with a different silver bullet every time, oh, it's corporations, oh, it's the individual or it's local. I'm a real fan of Eleanor Ostrom's thing that the solution to a global problem is not a global solution. It's polycentric. It's everywhere there's a center, everywhere you have pressure. And I think silver bullets of any kind are, they worked for the Lone Ranger in the 1950s, but you don't solve wicked problems with silver bullets. So that's just, but I think this is a group that seems to like silver bullets. And it could be because of its technical, you know, software heritage or something or other, but I think I really see that what you're saying that this group like silver bullets, I think is really true. Yeah, another way to put it, you could say also it's about having the silver bullets on all the levels or something. It's more inclusive to say like it's not, I don't see something against silver bullets. I just kind of want to mention that that's kind of a human, silver bullets, more of a human limitation than this group. We can only process five things at a time. So we can do a limited to one. Silver bullets are American. I think they're universal. I see that issue all around the whole world. I mean, the phrase is American. Yeah. Yeah. Well, the superhero movies are also kind of American, maybe, I'm not sure. But then it's more, yeah, anyhow, I don't think that goes to any essence. But I remember also Steve Waddell spoke on Global Action Networks where he says, it's actually about bringing together all the actors and making them work together on the solutions. And doing this will create change. For instance, if you've got slave diamonds in the South Africa, if you've got the ones who sell it in Antwerp, for instance, there's a big sales of diamonds, then you bring the two actors together to talk about what could be a solution. And working on this multi actor level might be the most effective as well. And I guess, Klaus, you're doing that as well or not? The core reason why corporations are so much successful is that they're working in a hierarchy. So you have very few people make a decision, which is then being executed throughout this hierarchy. The problem with these very few people making decisions is that they are basically devoid of any moral compass and have ambitions that are counter to the interests of the rest of society. But that China is amazingly successful because of its hierarchy. The problem with hierarchy then is on the one hand, yes, it's super efficient. But on the other hand, it is not guided by the commons. But so as we are competing against these very successful hierarchies, we also have to establish some hierarchy. We can't all be running in the circle without having a clear understanding of the construct that we are trying to support and what our role could be within this construct. So what we are just put a project outline into the chart here, I mean, we're trying to develop a construct that helps us to self organize in a way where anyone can find a place saying, yeah, I could really function here and make an impact. So in a completely decentralized, in a completely self-organizing fashion, but there has to be a vision first that we all embrace. And once we embrace that vision, then we can find a place within it that caters or that speaks to our unique skills, our superpowers, our ability to contribute. So that's where I'm pushing with this project. Simon? Yeah, I was thinking about what you said there, Klaus, about hierarchies and corporations and the people at the top, a handful of people making the decisions. I think the problem is compounded by the fact that the whole corporation is structured on ambition, where we're all taught that we want to be at the top of the hierarchy making those decisions. I'm particularly inspired by just a simple quote, give what you can, receive what you need. I think the future has to be far more egalitarian and people need to redefine what it is to be ambitious. And if it's simply within career terms, then nothing's going to change because it feeds into those big corporations. They control the educational system, they control the message in terms of what ambition is. And when the world's on fire, as you describe it, aspiring to a big house and a fast car doesn't make a lot of sense, does it? But people are still the message. Thanks. Michael? Yeah, I'm just struck by what you said, Eric, earlier and actually Simon and Klaus, you too, that dealing with things at multiple levels has to be inspired by changing hearts and minds at the most distributed level. So I think it's very right that we have to find the things that decentralized groups and individuals can do, but realize that doing things that affect the conversation that filters up the hierarchy to legislators, to corporate leaders, to the point where they're realizing, we are operating in a capitalist system or we are operating in response to voters and there is a sentiment going around that X thing is a problem and we at least better look better. I mean, you see energy companies and in some cases, you see like, oh, well, people kind of want electric cars, oh, well, people kind of want us to, I mean, BP totally cynically going from British petroleum to beyond petroleum and having a logo that is a green flower, even as they are responsible for the most terrible, most negatively effective oil spill in American history. It's terrible, but you also see that it's built on people's response to sentiments that are building in a decentralized, I hesitate to use the word populist, but popular way and it's not a silver bullet and you know, I don't like the idea of using bullets as a metaphor because that would go to me saying, like, we need to give everybody the ammunition, you know, they all need to have bullets. But it is true that the talking points and the sentiment and the things that end up filtering up as I'm going to do something popular, I mean, you know, Biden is saying things right now that would have been perceived as absolutely, you know, communistic and radical if they'd come out of the mouth of, you know, Bill Clinton 20 years ago. But the conversation has changed enough around around climate change around inequality around all these things and that all happened bottom up. So, you know, attaching attaching terms to these things, whether it's, you know, fair trade, organic, sustainable, regenerative, you know, stories of what people can do and what organizations they can connect with as as as Klaus is saying, seems key to getting what's happening at the top and what's happening from the corporate interests to like bend at least bend and legislation to happen. Vincent, you also want to say something? Yeah, so thanks, Eric. So a few points. So on the point of like making corporations bend, like I'm curious what you guys think about Elon Musk and like the different companies that Elon Musk has, you know, helped kind of bring into flourishing. And I feel like my personal opinion is that they've actually like nailed the storytelling and they've sold a vision for the future that makes people really excited about going to space or driving an electric car or having tunnels underground, right? Like stuff that would be kind of boring or or that that people aren't really as like interested in. People are excited about it now again because of the way that Elon Musk has built this kind of like brand and like fetishize the future, even if the future that we're actually heading towards is not going to be that great. It's like it's it's all about the perceived future. And and and while it seems like someone like Elon Musk, especially with like the electrification has had a lot of like, you know, kind of positive impacts on the world, I also am kind of hesitant to like when you look at the bigger picture of the different solutions, for example, the Hyperloop is very much still relying on car infrastructure, even if it's electric cars, it's not like, why don't we just create better subway systems, right? Like it's actually just kind of preserving the current car based economy and status quo. And although Tesla has like put a huge push on the electric industry to like adopt electric, I think that's probably the biggest positive like systemic impact that Elon Musk has had. But I don't know, besides that, I almost feel like those efforts kind of go in vain without really changing the bigger picture system of things. I'm curious what other people think about that. Yeah, to me, there's no better way to describe how alienated the scope is from the real world than impossible foods and beyond meats. I mean, that's an outcome of Bill Gates studying a research lab in around 2012 or 2010 or so in Seattle to experiment with plant based protein extracts and make them taste like meat. And that has advanced and he did this in partnership with Monsanto, and he's a major investor in both of these companies. And all of this was run through the World Economic Forum, where all these very powerful, very wealthy people are controlling wealth beyond most governments. Gates is rumored to have invested $6 billion in this entire venture. And what it does, it continues the destruction of the natural world because it's soy based. So when that came about, you can see in South America, Brazil, erasing more of the Amazon to clear the room for more soy, which is then being processed into a protein extract, which is then being processed further with GMO, with artificial yeast cultures that are then transferring that into something that tastes like meat. They are so alienated and so separated from the natural world. They find technical solutions that ignore, first of all, socioeconomic needs of the population. I mean, what are these people all supposed to do who are now eating artificial meat? I mean, it's like 60, 70% of the world population is in some way or form connected with producing food, coring food, processing food and so on. So the callousness and the philosophical separation of an Elon Musk and Bill Gates and all these names from nature itself is what is causing incredible problems. And then we have no regulatory oversight because the World Economic Forum is people, there's no government in there. So they basically have multinational corporations making decisions over our food supply where there is no European Union or even United States or anybody powerful enough to insert regulatory oversight into this process. There's no public debate. Is this the right thing to do? What is the impact of it? And you can see right now in the political arena how people are fighting over this to reject the influence or the impact of government. Thanks. Thank you Klaus. I find it a really interesting topic and I wonder also if you would just do the remaining 30 minutes like a check-in as usually Jared is doing it. And for me those questions we are talking about are really essential. I really love to understand like what is the level that makes most sense to interact or to react or to activate or I don't know how to call it like what are the essential levels that we can have leverage points or something. Anyhow, shall we continue with check-in or is there any other preference in the room? I just have a quick comment. I wonder how much it would cost to create an OGM movie if we took like all the OGM calls or all like similar calls like talking about what we've been talking about, clip together the best snippets and add other content to kind of like create a very compelling story of like you know kind of condensing these conversations into like a kind of movie or documentary format. I'm curious A if that would be something that might actually be able to change people's perspective of these problems, B would be feasible and C would be something that we actually might be able to pull off. It seems like there's just so much thought and like past synthesizing of this like these very complex problems that goes into these calls and I'm always like there needs to be like 200 people here listening not you know not 20 or 30 so I'm just curious what you guys think about that. Does anybody like to react on this? Thought I've thought oh sorry. It's an awesome idea I'd love to promote that Vincent if you could put it together by tomorrow. You know I've often thought that and and we've talked about this a little bit before that um the idea of a presentation you know maybe it's not the form that the Thursday meeting takes but the idea of inviting people to present some concept you know like if if this call had been you know build in advance as um centering around questions of of um our food systems and their effect and you know Klaus and a couple of other panelists that you know he chose had had done a presentation at the beginning and then there was a Q&A and we disseminated the fact that this was happening far and wide and then the next week it was on another subject and it was you know Kevin talking about the project that he's doing you know all different projects and also projects from people who are not historically OGMers there would be more effect I mean we're we're talking a lot among ourselves now and and to what Vincent was saying and then that would be something with a subject that would be searchable by other people who would be looking around for information on a particular subject it's hard even even if even if you knew OGM and even if you knew the subjects we were talking about you would never find the conversations we're having and you're right Vincent it would have to be like you know supercut in different ways for it to be useful and for other people to hear it but I think there's something that we can do about what the what the form OGM conversations take is so that even without production they they leave something more valuable and possibly attract more people okay one short comment there is that I believe there's something about just this open space that the Jerry has been offering it seems to have done a lot over a year like the first year just people being able to express themselves and find each other seems to have added value to many people and now I wonder if there is a search for what is what's next also Jerry has been experimenting with maybe different formats what I hear you say is kind of let's have an overarching topic or someone presenting something so that's that's a nice idea I guess and I don't mean to say Eric just to to clarify I'm not saying instead I'm saying and you know you know this is the metaphor that's been used before is like this is church you know we're getting together we're all we're all singing from the same hymnal and you know it's it's very nice to to share our thoughts with each other and we get inspired sometimes a couple of us you know go do something but this is a church with a closed membership that never has the little thing out front that says you know sermon this I'm not a big fan of religion so I'm sorry I'm using this metaphor but you know you know sermon on Sunday on this you know come on come one come all and if you're interested in that so I mean I just think that kind of outreach piece and and permeability is important too. Thanks Bill I would just I would just say I actually had this conversation with Jerry yesterday about both the format of this call and how we kind of could have either changed this call or have additional calls and I apologize Mike my camera's off I had a small procedure the other day on my face so I'm just leaving the camera off for today but one thought was that we could have different facilitators potentially like have different people who are part of the community facilitate the conversation the other part was what Michael's talking towards which is to talk about specific projects to learn more about what people are working on to have conversation around those projects and leave that open space that way I'm in favor of kind of diving deeper into what people are working on and maybe that's the way we activate our community in terms of hey like that sounds like a really interesting project then you have a recording you can put into MatterMost you can have a call out say like if anyone's interested in volunteering time or energy or resources please reach out I think and as well as kind of externally if you want to but I think that's a pretty sensible path forward I would just I would say okay thanks so John yeah yes in some ways what we're talking about exists in parallel on clubhouse and to mean at least nine out of ten clubhouse rooms are would be a waste of time you know and I might tap in and say well yeah clearly these people are either drifting the way we are on a very bad day or they're going down a weird rabbit hole that I don't want to go down but that one in ten and and some of them do overlap there's the there's a solar punk one there's a post abundance kind of conversation and in those conversations there's a lot more energy comes into the room a lot more people come in and go in the audience now there's interesting things about them they're hierarchic there's there people on stage and then there's people listening and you can ask to come up on stage but sometimes you can't get on stage I mean it's sometimes it's crowded or sometimes the people who are on stage that's the reason why people are there they're there they see that name and they know that linking and a whole bunch of people come into the room because so-and-so there's this guy Chris Fornoff there's a of course Eric Weinstein you know there's a couple of people who have followings because whether you agree with them or not they've been able to articulate rich position informationally rich positions and so they get up there and they say this is how it is or isn't it this way and a lot of people say wow at least I'm going to pay attention to that now there's a there's another model and I'm not going to you know the model is there are a lot of things we won't we don't like about this model like the the debate model or the you know there's several debate models including debate models where it's real obvious to everybody that yes it's a debate and yes they're going to vote at the end and they're going to vote on which side changed but really it's a it's a platform for people who have evolved positions on a thing to to articulate their position and the debate structure is just a trick a trick to frame the positions and there might be something there I I don't know that it's debate structure there there's a thing that people do in the Bay Area called bats it's they said you know people aren't coming to improv even though it's really interesting stuff but let's have a competition between two improv groups we'll make it theater sports and then you know it'll be more interesting so I mean something something that you know we have a group or we have funny dollars or we have green dollars or whatever we are you know and we're going to hear pitches for what is the best thing you could do in the next six months and there are various people are going to pitch and then here we're going to vote the the green dollars that are the green dollars real no but they're not not real either they're they'll be recorded we'll see we'll see that outcome we might take further action as in the things that get green dollars the suggestion there is drill real more in that direction the things that don't get any green dollars maybe maybe delay drilling on that direction let's go into that one about okay what do we do about agriculture now in the next six months and along and continuum of of who we are and what we have potentially to contribute so that's just a framework I know it's not it's not really an answer but I think if something other than just a a documentary would be necessary to to broaden the engagement and we might have to deal with hierarchy we might have to deal with you know okay we need some we need some cheerleaders basically for these things we need people who are pitching in order to generate the energy and focus around it that's that's going to be necessary to bring the other people in okay thanks um so how i'm a bit confused like what is the best way forward but I I do feel something for a check-in that may be like an extra question but i'm not clear yet something like what's going on for you and what seems to essential in regards to OGM right now something like that but uh yeah klaus yeah i just i wanted to to clarify uh when I say hierarchy um sorry I'm just to click the wrong button here and I say hierarchy I mean hierarchy of ideas not not organizational or structural hierarchy no but there has to be uh an agreed upon course of action that requires um a model and then so within and that model is hierarchical because you need you need to structure the idea and the the activation of this idea in a way that allows different components to fit into it if that makes sense so it's not about creating hierarchy in a in a in an organizational sense there's jerry jerry holy crap so I'm pretty sure I was in this link it's just that it was just Stacey and me and we just spent an hour talking hi everybody oh and I was like where'd everybody go damn phil thanks for telling me that this that this was here I checked my email I checked matter most in the calls channel I'm like if somebody if somebody's missing or not missing us surely they'll pipe up there so I I totally missed anybody trying to figure out where we were or whatever so so I'd interrupt you can introduce yourself that's what I'm I'm the newest monster in the monster factory and I'm I'm in training to figure out how to go scare kids because the world is powered by children's screams yeah sorry sorry jerry I want to reach out earlier I joined at quarter to the hour as well so I assumed you'd excuse yourself somewhere um no it's it's it's like I I was just sitting there Stacey and I had a very nice conversation for an hour going golly where is everybody it's interesting I yeah sorry we probably should have poked you a bit you know what it looks like it turned out the way it needed to turn out so I'm happy you all are here and this call is being recorded somehow so was ours and I'm pretty sure it was the same link so I was in a I was in like an an 80 person zoom not run by me a couple weeks ago where the zoom just broke mid-call and everybody was trying to come back into the same place we ended up in two different pods and the whole meeting just kind of dissolved because there was a process we were trying to go through and it didn't you know the process fell apart once we weren't one cohort so I think that this might be random zoom lightning of some sort sounds like scaling issues they're starting to try and distribute the load and yeah something anyway don't let me know where were you where were you let me uh I think right now we were kind of talking about the format of the or gm calls and okay about having like a main focus or someone pitching something in the beginning but also having both ends like one element is really focusing on a certain topic then but then still having this open space or something about having cheerleaders and facilitators is anything essential that anybody wants to add because I'm not a good synthesizer for them maybe but that was pretty good as far as I'm concerned yeah that was great Eric okay thanks I'm really I'm really interested in alternate formats experiments whatever we might do and I don't know how many people who join for the and it's very funny because it just being Stacy and me I was like well that seems like definitive evidence that something's fucked up about these calls um so I'm totally happy to experiment with these calls and see where it is and I don't know how many people just like us to go around the room and check in and feel like that's I know that Scott mooring several times long ago was saying like this is like this feels like my community check in I I'm you know waiting for that so Scott I that was like like a signal for me that what we were doing was okay in the rhythm that it was in but but experiments would be cool yeah I'm good it's good my my first observation I think was similar to what you said Jerry about you were in the room with one other person and wondering oh all right maybe this is how things are going and what's interesting to me is that I was in this room and I felt the same thing and I I actually took a little screenshot because I do from time to time because I like to remember who I'm going with and I thought has OGM jumped the shark has the Thursday the Thursday call 1.0 has that has that chapter closed and now it's something new and because before it was it really was people hanging out because they didn't have anyone hang out with I mean it was like you couldn't go anywhere you couldn't talk to anyone you show up and there's all these people and they're from around the world and they're doing all these interesting things and everyone's excited to see everybody and then there was that transition period kind of phase two if you will where okay well wait a minute what are we doing what are we doing because what are we doing here we start to lose a few people and then people started coalesce into actual projects and things are happening and and you know people started to get some traction on that and then as that happened things it changed but we kind of have left it as oh it's the same thing it's still the Thursday call everybody's getting together and just saying hi how you doing and if I remember right in the matter most it was like the last week was labeled the somber call or something like that or maybe it was two weeks ago or something and I thought all due respect and I mean this sincerely the problems you all are trying to deal with are are somber they're huge they're wicked they don't have solutions they just have dances that we have to figure out you know you can't solve these things they just exist and you can make them better or you can make them worse but but you know you have to just be with these problems and try to try to help but that changes the nature of the call and the work that we do and I I think that's that's you know it's it's needed absolutely but it also when I come in on the Thursday I'm like oh okay everyone's going to talk about all of the stuff we have to do and I think yeah okay that's that's true and yet that's also I miss I miss the coffee time too you're reminding me vividly kind of that when I lived in Berkeley on Thursday mornings we met John I don't know if you've gone to these uh yeah but but like Thursday mornings at sols deli basically down like a block down from uh what's the famous shape and ease in in get in the gourmet ghetto gourmet gulch what's it called and and it was really fun because like the geeks in Berkeley were just hanging out and over bagels and coffee and scrambled eggs or whatever it was really fun and that's a piece of what's intended here it's interesting that you say that because I have a comment that I'm going to put forth in another group that is called a cohort and my comment is going to be you can call something a cohort but that doesn't make it a cohort because there's just no activity there's no life and I know that there's all these other ogm worlds you know I see all the emails and things which I'm not really participating in but I think that's the that's the nature of that is that we're all working on these things and you kind of oh what are you working on oh what are you working on and you and you just it's not that you're you're in bed together as much as you are just sort of oh you're kind of inspired by that and then they look at your thing and they say oh you know maybe that would be interesting over here or have you met and I think Doug had made a really interesting comment earlier about most of us seem to be working either at the global level or at the individual local level and that the real power in his estimation was in the middle and then Eric brought up this idea of well at what level are we best able to work and I don't know as we got anywhere as we tend to as we go meta then we get meta about our meta as we tend to do but I think that was just an interesting idea because I see Klaus getting some real traction with his food systems and Vincent with his you know his collective systems that he's trying to build and I think Eric in the same way and and you know then there's other people who are working working at the local level with really small groups of people and and and how do you how do you make an impact as opposed to just as I think John Kelly was talking about on the thing where everybody listens into the conversations clubhouse clubhouse where there's a lot of people sitting around naval gazing and they're just not they're not getting anywhere but there's a few that are that are actually getting some traction and and I don't know so now I'm starting to get off track but but that was kind of a summary of what we talked about and and it's that difficult balance between working together and being together I think I would like to add something to what you just said Scott like for me the quality of your journey is a kind of hard space on the big amount of complexity that we're dealing with there's like a space where we can really express ourselves and where something seems to sink like for me it's been very activating mentally because there's so many ideas on the call but at the same time there's an atmosphere which is open inclusive in a way accepting everyone's viewpoints and really trying to figure out together and and seeing all the different viewpoints at the same time at the same time there is also this kind of dread and the world the house is on fire we were talking about before I think we have to deal with world pain we have to deal also with this is affecting us on a personal level as well and the struggle of trying to get things done is very painful on a certain level as well like it's there's a lot of frustration a lot of trying a lot of burnout a lot of levels of how do we deal with this and what's the most meaningful thing then to do together because I wanted to make sense for me I wanted to help me move forward and that's kind of in itself maybe also a wicked problem even how do we do OGM calls it's not a simple question I would say and we might find a simple answer and then we have a balance and equilibrium all by itself but I want to just also say those different points to yeah bring it in our awareness I just I just want to express how grateful I am for what you just said that was really lovely and helpful and and and sometimes we have somber calls because there's all these global crises a lot of us are trying to figure out how to make a living doing this thing and trying to be helpful and that's we have like our own little personal crises you know going along the side and in the middle we're trying to pick our way through the giant hairball of issues that that that where we would like to improve or make a dent in and anybody else on this team Jerry just to to share with you I put something in the chat but Vincent had raised the idea of I hope I'm going to be saying this okay but Vincent you can pipe up if I'm not describing it correctly but the idea of creating sort of thinking about how self-reflexive what we're doing what we have been doing ongoingly is and that that it's useful in that but how all the important things that are said in little snippets over the course of multiple conversations you know that to be able to bring those together in an edited way even on certain subjects and have those available to people outside our small community would be a useful thing because you wouldn't know to delve into one of our long calls to get into the group and I think that's a great idea and that I was also bringing up in the chat the idea that doing somebody had mentioned clubhouse just in general and I guess was John who was talking about it's admittedly hierarchical structure where you have like imagine that this conversation was happening among us it had been convened on clubhouse other people who had intersected with us in other ways on other platforms but were on clubhouse I'm sorry had intersected with us in other clubhouse meetings would see you know Michael is talking Eric is talking Jerry is talking class talk you know be brought to this group in real time and might be in the hallway as they call it and and listening to our conversation so that would bring in new people and other people who were attracted by the subject we were discussing would show up and be the audience and maybe some people would raise their hands and get on stage and become part of this you know conversation and then become part of Thursday zoom check-ins and you know there would be some some outreach from that and that's you know a fairly low lift thing to do you know maybe maybe holding a meeting or two on clubhouse just as an experiment among us might be a worthwhile thing to do so this I have to bounce in five minutes and you're all welcome to stay here since you were doing just fine before I bounce in but what you just said fits exactly and perfectly a conversation I had two Sundays ago with a guy named Pat Stannell who I didn't know before that at all he and I are on a geeky telecom mailing list and I really liked his post so I wrote him separately and I said dude you know I'd love to just talk and do my emails and we had a great conversation about a bunch of stuff he is like Eric like me like Scott like a bunch of us trying to solve the world's problems and he's got four books that are none of which are actually sort of published but he's working on a series of answers to how the world works but as a result of our conversation I was like what if OGM were on the surface a vlog or a podcast or a show and under the surface we were doing OGM-y things to all of the conversations and all the artifacts of the show and the subjects of our show were kind of like a pilgrimage to big thinkers who were trying to solve the different pieces of the puzzle and we might have a couple of them together and the object would be to see where is the overlap in their thinking and and like the object would be not to just do a bunch of broadcasts with famous people and whatever but to try to deconstruct and crystallize what we're all trying to say about how to how to fix the world how to improve the world and and the name weaving the world was like an idea that came up it's maybe a little too big maybe weaving something smaller but the idea of weaving I like a lot because I think some of the tools we're talking about these these you know visualization tools are the modern loom they're their idea looms in different ways and we're trying to weave a context or a fabric for society to be able to hang in and build stuff together and there's kind of a shared asset so what if we just create a show and the show doesn't have to live in one platform so what you all just said about clubhouse we could meet once a week twice a week we could have set hours you know in clubhouse that then feed the rest of the things that we're doing and are just we could just sort of show up on clubhouse to say who else wants to be part of this this is what we're doing here so how the conversation works but then underneath under the hood under the ground we would have like my seal but too bad Judy's not on the call but like then do it at connections made between the kinds of things that we're doing and then we could we could promote and find and maybe fund and build some of the connections between the tools we could do the work that we're trying to do at the tools level kind of underneath as we move forward so that the results of all these these different things would show up more useably more visibly more usefully in the commons as we go and i'm i'm i'm thinking here of the way that max harper took the transcript of one of our early ogm calls and mapped it in miro so that you could see the conversation as a visual dialogue that's really interesting and that's just one of a hundred different ways you could sort of do this several of you are working to just make the zoom chats more usable because when the transcript shows up it's just the text file with a lot of time stamps and a lot of garbage in it so how do we strip that away and make it more usable but how do we also flow that into the general body of work we're tiering together so if that sounds interesting like let me know or whatever but but that was that was already in my head before you just said what you just said so it i'm just curious could we have like a raise of hands who thinks that making a part of ogm into a show is an interesting idea raise your hand michael skeptical but maybe and and and the important that if the show eats up all of our energy and we suddenly become show producers that's probably not a good thing but how do we take what we're already doing and and like make it more visible usable and be part of the larger kind of conversations is interesting to me and any thoughts before i have to bounce there's not so many social change podcasts on this kind of level so it might be a niche that's interesting for people that's there's plenty of podcasts so people are trying to talk big thoughts about how to solve the world and politics and whatnot there's a lot of those but i'm wondering how we like how we differentiate what we say michael you were skeptical yeah i want to jump again yeah yeah i mean i would say that i do feel like there are a lot of podcasts like this you know i mean i just i just feel like these kinds of conversations are going on everywhere and the the the pushback i had on the notion of show is what i was saying about about clubhouse is already more hierarchical than we are but is beneficial in the fact that it invites people in and there's a really permeable membrane from being an audience member to being a participant whereas a show sounds more like you know we know and listen to us so that that was my skepticism is just show maybe the wrong framing it's maybe it's a public conversation or a public i like the word like inquiry i think inquiry is really nice like collective inquiry collaborative inquiry that's maybe a better framing i don't know i'm just pushing i'm just pushing the participatory nature of it nature of it that makes it you know something that people enter into i think we many of us have to go to other calls so so so stew on that thank you for being here you've like brightened my day a lot and see you in the on the tubes and next week and all that thanks thank you everyone also for the introductions it's really helped thank you thank you eric for for being our our guide our thrown thrown into the into the job and yeah for me it was really valuable to see the introductions of people it helped me to connect to the human being and the motivation and what what's like the real driving force of people in the call so at least for me it was helped i hope for this as well if anybody wants to stay on i'm happy to stay on for a while but uh yeah so i think i'm going to move on um the the the basic summary of what i was saying earlier is that i'm trying to help people who are overwhelmed figure out what to do next and for most people that's not solve the it's what can i do here now in my space so okay but it all rolls up anyway thank you guys well thanks scott john michael vincenzo see you later yeah eric i thought you were so there you go i was just gonna say he did a good job moderating i thought i saw i came in late and i thought darry was intentionally not gonna be at the call and that he had passed it to eric to take over and i was like oh no it was an odd moment where you know like i said i i felt like it had jumped the shark does that reference mean anything to you okay well well all right so so it's worth it's worth explaining so there was a show called happy days which was in the 1970s i think um and it was very popular it was just classic sitcom you know and bar one or what it's a bar one yeah it was in the bar there was yeah it was like set in the 1950s so anyway show's been on for years everybody watches it because you know in the 70s it was just on at a certain time slot and that's all you had your choice for so at one point one of the main characters goes out to california and is in a he has to jump a a tank of sharks on waterskis this has nothing to do with the regular program at all it's just like they have this weird little side thing and so what it what it became is a a metaphor for when a tv show is like okay they jumped the shark like they they lost their vision they went on and and did this like they're they're trying to keep their audience they were trying to do something they they lost their way and then it expanded beyond television programs and jumped the shark just meant whatever this used to be it was great and now fast in the furious nine you know like or or it was probably several back but but that's that's the phrase that's where it came from it was this moment when you realize no they're they're they're done whatever that was was awesome but it's done now it's this joke in space balls where they say like rocky five thousand exactly it's the same joke it's the same joke so it's worth saying and so when i came on and i saw one the group was small two the group was somber three the group was silent and not animated at all and and claus had even said everybody's so quiet i thought oh and then jerry wasn't there i just thought wow this thursday call has kind of jumped the shark you know it was something and i think the reason that everyone was attracted to it has gone away because it it peaked it had you know we had 25 people on the call every week and then it just kind of stopped well it depends because there's different dynamics right like it can have jumped the shark but there's also possibility this is sometimes sitcoms will have a break off sitcom you know like they'll take one of the characters and they'll they'll have their own show i think the thursday call has become its own show and the original series is just it's it's dead it's not what it used to be at all um which was you're talking about the check-ins and everyone was excited to get in and and and jerry would moderate and just like you did to keep everyone getting their little window but we lost the the optimism we lost the excited to see you bit um you know and that's okay reductions was the best idea it helped me but i wonder if it helped the call but uh i i i like it because i can get finally a picture of what people are really doing like that often there's like a story in the week what keeps them busy but in between the lines you can kind of read what they're doing but i like also to really hear what they're doing so but then one thing i did notice one thing i did notice is that no one passed on giving their background yes sure and that's i think in a lot of ways most people especially with weighty topics like this are just looking for someone to listen anyone to listen so they can say what it is that they're that's important to them yeah and i'm also wondering how to identify what's really going on because i i can make assumptions about what's going on but still why does it go down the number it's tricky to figure really figure out really i wonder i wonder what you wanted to tell me before i jumped off the call and is i know it's i he wanted to tell me so then i jumped back on so yeah i was saying i know i was like literally just i said you left um no i was just gonna say so i from my perspective i thought that jerry passed the ball to you to just moderate the call in his absence and you're doing a great job um but yeah to kind of and to kind of add on to the last topic here i feel like there's like a i've noticed a pattern and i feel like there's almost like a forcing function on both sides so the group starts um it starts off very conversationally based right so i feel like to collab in some ways ogm uh clubhouse rooms like systems innovators on clubhouse it starts off just as having conversations and then after so and if new people are constantly kind of cycling in it it's very natural that that conversation and that kind of style can kind of continue because like new faces are coming in and so you know it's you you're constantly kind of wanting to you know continue sharing and updating people and um you know redoing the introductions and kind of what i found is like after a certain point where the almost the the number of people in the group and that the faces kind of like levels off and i feel like there's this natural sense to like maybe we should be doing something more right so it's like we've had you know all these conversations and if we're having the same conversations amongst the same group of people and then there's this kind of i don't know natural sense that i've got that people are like they want to do something about the conversation about the things that we talk about and then it's like okay how do we change the call to be able to get more stuff done to be able to create some sort of impact and and then the further in that direction it goes then you start to like lose people that we're coming to the call just to socialize and so yeah i'm kind of just reflecting on that now that there's this pattern of like people come to these calls probably mostly for the socialization aspect and we're all talking about like pretty weighty issues and we all want to actually be the change that or be a part of the change we want to see in the world and then i feel like it might be a mistake to turn the call into something else when we should just be adding on top of it but i feel like because everyone is in a rhythm and everyone is showing up at that time i think there's a natural tendency to say let's just turn this call and the energy here into something else like you know transmute the energy into some other form because the energy is already here whereas i feel like the better way to do it is to take the energy and then kind of throw people on a diving board and say okay now take the deep dive and pick which pool you're jumping into and what would it look like if we do that what would be an example of how that could work because we can't we can't do we can't be on a diving board so what is the exact thing that we think it's doing other i think it's having other calls outside of these like having not just one call week that we're trying to do like everything it's having it's spitting off other smaller groups and calls which within ogm has worked like the free jerry's brain group like very focused on software people go in and aren't willing to dive in and talk about software and get things done then you know they they're not going to come so it's a natural kind of filtering there and you know and then i feel like the flotilla friday group spun off and we're like just talking about platforms and like interoperability and so that stuff is already happening okay um well yeah i think i think it need to be vince vince and to your point what i'm what i'm reflecting on is a um a classic systems thinking phrase the purpose of a system is what it does and the idea is yeah it's not it's not what you designed it to do it's what it actually does and this system is filtering for the people who want to get together to try to solve big problems and and you can see it because that's who showed up and that's who keeps showing up week after week and the people who want to get together just to hang out and have a little bit of creative stimulation from other people's projects those people have stopped showing up and so the purpose of a system is what it's actually doing and so the system is is saying this is what this group is and the other people are are naturally being filtered out and so i don't think it's it's good or bad i think it just is and we have to is and we have to decide okay is that what it is now or should that be a separate call because this is trying to become well maybe there's a little bit of a nostalgia for what it was and and now it's something different and so okay well it's something different and if you want the other thing then um you know maybe that has to be recreated so that that's kind of my thought on it is that just looking at who's showing up i believe that is what it what it has become it's it's it's a sense of what's going on it's still an assumption right scott we can't know for sure that that's the case correct we can't know that it it's filtering out because of that's like we tried to grasp it but i'm not sure well it's assuming that anyone who wants to be part of this call knows about it and what i what i think has happened is that that the people who knew about the call have been filtered based on on those two things but they're the new people there's just not many okay i want to name another level and what's going on uh maybe is there's like this theory of the four stages of of social groups and social dynamics at first when you come in a new group you completely adapt to the surroundings and you try to do the things that's asked from you like if it's in workshops i think or anything like you're really trying to really be as well adapted to the situation as you can um individually um and then maybe at a certain moment there's a conflict erupting and then and then you find a new level i don't know the theory well enough to say the levels but it's like there's different levels of adapting and there's different levels of challenging the system and the end result what you like to reach is like growth together but there's also a phase of conflicts there and there's a and there's a new level of adaptation after conflict and after adaptation there's growth together and that's actually like you can really express yourself in your in your deepest sense and in your deepest sense of honesty and somehow i guess there's been conflict coming up but it's not always seen as conflict or it's not always seen as it's like people have different opinions on how to tackle the biggest world issues and maybe there's different views and sometimes it seems like a conflict but i don't see it necessarily as a conflict because everyone's doing their work and they're focusing on something huge but as ogm it's not that clear what it what it can be if it's everything all together and then it's normal that these kind of conflicts come up and that we maybe want to evolve into a next step but how do you hold the conflicts in a way that it doesn't take down the energy of the group because the conflicts need to be there i think in a way and how to be supportive for conflicts or something i don't know what or what the question is or what the result is and if my expose was clear i i heard someone say it this way that that we you know we're thinking of conflict as two fists and if you instead think of it as a rock and a flint and you can make sparks and create a fire yeah and it's it's approaching this as a tool rather than an obstacle and i think that's when that's that's what i'm noticing i agree and i haven't seen that many people doing it in a in a way that really holds the conflict in a good way like i during this call i try to just give attention to different like moderated in a way that everybody's heard but still the deeper underlying things for me that's really difficult to get hold of like what's really going on here in the conversation when somebody's saying oh the food system is the most important place to tackle and we should tackle it on a hierarchical level or at a corporate level and the problem is that it's hierarchy and then somebody else is saying yeah but i think we i want to advise the public those are really two very valid ways of working with the issues and they can exist next to each other but somehow it kind of seems to turn into a conflict how do we not make this a conflict how do we do it like that it becomes flint and how do we how do we make constructive conflict also in the term like and if i've seen i don't know is it it's i'm trying to figure out what it is really well the conflict to me has has been in deciding where to spend your time i haven't heard anyone say at least not openly you know food systems don't don't worry about that you should work on this instead or or local funding for minority businesses you shouldn't work on that you should work on this instead no one is saying don't work on that what we're bumping into i think is you have time and resources each one of us individually that are limited and so we're all working on the things that we want to work on and it feels like a lot of these conversations are softly convincing other people this is what you should be working on and like like like help come come and help me work on this you know i think you're what you're doing is great but what i'm looking for is people to help me work on my thing and and it's i i don't i'm trying to articulate this but it feels like it's not saying that's a bad idea or that idea needs to be improved it's it's more about trying to pick the thing to work on and you know someone like Vincent or Klaus have gone ahead and said this is my thing this is what i'm working on and if anybody wants to come along that's great and if you don't i'm still going to work on it i'm not going to work on your thing i'm working on my thing and i will tell you about it every week but i'm not going to stop working on food systems to go work on another problem i'm building a you know an infrastructure for information i'm not doing that and i think that that's being clear about the conflicts that we're having and the purposes of getting together it's really it's really the conflict of a toddler that you're trying to get to come along with you you know you're you're going and they're coming with you or they're not but they're they're kind of you know they're dragging their feet and you just you let them go but you're not going to change your direction because someone's causing trouble or doesn't want to go with you and i think that's what is what is the best form of our conflict and maybe it's when Doug says hey i think we should be operating in the middle level because you know everybody's operating at these two levels and then we we discuss that and we say hmm i i wonder where the best level is and then we take that back to our own thing but i i just um i think we don't know what we're arguing about or we're not clear about that so that's why we get together and we say hey we're all trying to decide the one thing that we do and no we won't but maybe i can make your thing a little better maybe you can make my thing a little better and maybe we'll even go away and and work together a little bit but yeah i think having the conversation helps us figure out what we do individually maybe not collectively right like seeing what other people are working on and sharing right is like gives us clarity and also like you know the feedback i've gotten that's like this piece that you're doing is like in the right direction in the right path and it kind of gives you some some feedback to like you know continue working on that piece i think i have to run in a minute i agree with that vince that that to me is the value is in the random things that people say this to me is exposure to the new because you're all working on things i'm not working on and you're going to say something and i'm going to say oh that's great wow i can use that for my thing yeah yeah exactly but i yeah another another level i would like to name because i think it might be important it's kind of like what's the feeling tone of people entering the room and how they talk the feeling tone meaning like aside from their message also like underlying how you're really feeling about stuff and how are the how are we then feeling as a group there's something about that i'm not really clear about because it seems to have shifted there was more lightness before now there seems to be more heaviness kind of well it took to my point earlier anytime you want to get something done it gets heavier it just automatically gets heavier you're interacting with the real world and real systems and you know you're not just talking because you can talk and debate all the time but once you really want to do something now it it gets heavy because people are asking you to commit time energy resources that are finite or work against things it's just hard it's hard to make make things change there's momentum yeah so i guess there's a part of trying to figure out by yourself and then see you later vincent take care scott i don't know i mean there's there's joy in getting getting around and just talking about stuff which i think you seem to enjoy as as people say things you you will you will question it you will you will step back you will reframe it you know and that's that's interesting it's a bit deeper uh in the sense that what i tried to do today by doing the introductions i really try to understand who are the people here and what does this dynamic need i already had maybe i was working on the same question and already like what came in the end of the call is kind of my own way in is like who who is this group of oj and people who are they really what is this dynamic what is the basic dynamic of this group what is try what's the driving force and i'm i'm like hmm there's something that becomes not clear and it's almost in my heart i feel like a hard thing there going on which i can't figure out and and it becomes more heavy when doing i agree to that but doing can also be very happy and uplifting and upbeat so there's something about what makes it heavy or not you can work on global issues that are very heavy and still remain okay with it i i talked to um john marx i think his name is like he's a he's a he builds one of the biggest peace networks in the world and he he never takes anything personal that's one of his rules and that's how he was able to deal with the heaviest conflicts in the world so he's dealing with the heaviest stuff but he's he's found a way not to make it too personal too heavy for him and i brought in so i'm trying to tackle that part of it i think it's you can talk lightly about the heaviest topics and it's fun it's inspiring you can also talk really heavily about the heaviest topic and then it's heavy i'm not sure where the difference lies yet and i take in your points it's not that i try to tell you what you're saying is not valuable because i i like what you say that's that's not what i'm saying is that you i i feel like you are a in a lot of ways yes and yes and and you enjoy exploring those things and and the the challenge i'm feeling is that if i'm in a kayak by myself i can row i'm doing but i can go in any direction and i can change direction at any time but if we're rowing together in a craft we all have to be pointed have to agree that we're going to go in in a direction and i i i think that that's not the nature of this group um there's no yeah yeah well do you uh have you ever heard of emily wopnik and uh multi potentialites uh she's talking about people who have different kind of interests and they swap around a lot in life they have like different career paths developing over different years um and she's she she then coined something called renaissance business and it's about bringing together all your interests in one business and what do you find a common interest and i kind of cherry comes from a background of uh tech tech innovation it seems yeah this main focus and but there's a lot of people coming into this group are really social change focused people and also facilitation focused people and working with corporations directly so it's less tech focused um so to say this is a group about tech and that's the overarching theme no is it about how to deal with knowledge in a large sphere yes but still it's like it's like so fuzzy in a way like a knowledge goes in all direction so it's so then so then what because we're not trying to figure out what freeze jerry's brain is going to look like we're being there as a group so what's our common focus as a group what's our common question do we have a question that could carry us and my fear with all of this trying to find solutions is that they come from the head too much and not really connect people like i i think the basic element of what jerry is doing is connecting on a hard level kind of thing as well and how do we how do we bridge this kind of wanting a direction which is more like trying to figure out and this hard level what what could meet that place is kind of a question i have if that makes sense to you uh it it does there in part of my recent classes one of the things they talked about was vision as a destination not as a as a an ongoing thing so it's a place you're headed in a sense and the idea that you can have in an organization this was organizational vision that you can have as many different why as people in the organization that's what you need to have one vision so we are headed to this place why are we going there well because i think it's interesting because this is my future career because i want to make some money because i am trying to publish something and this will help me there's all different reasons doesn't matter but the place you're going has to be defined and i think we uh we're all in the car together we're all on the bus together yeah and we're talking but but you know we're looking up at the driver saying where are we going again or maybe no the driver is turning back to us and saying where are you headed and we're all saying oh well we need to go to the we need to go to the agriculture place or we need to go here we need to go there and then so the driver keeps driving in circles because we haven't said go here we kind of like a bus that acts like a taxi this kind of thing yes we've got like a that tries to act like a taxi and and there's no way that and we're trying to figure out how are how are we a bus together how do we make this bus right meaning or something yeah well it's meaningful enough because here's the other thing about the purpose of a system is what it does we keep coming back because we apparently don't mind being in the bus talking even though we're we're driving in a circle you know it's okay well we're we're driving in a circle we haven't picked which direction we're going yet but we don't mind just just talking and yeah and my issue is that there's a disconnect in the intangible and the mind or I'm not sure even how to call this like there's this underlying thing the whole time I think one of the things that maybe I can name is like my own feeling about the world and about my own personal life hasn't been easy and I came in the calls and I kind of like being in the calls and I also find it challenging because it's so much information and people have so many different ways of thinking and and now I'm coming to a level where I actually can digest it better and I can start listening and really calming down and now I calm down I notice oh something's happening in this group like interesting um and I'm like last week I brought in a piece about um mental health and I know that it's kind of essential as a piece but it's maybe not the right timing for it to do it um but it's and I also think it's a too deep a dive to go there and I was talking after the call which I I love the conversation but still it's not what the group needs it seems that's what my feeling is saying so I wonder what does the group need I think the group does need a beatness it needs some kind of inspiring thing indeed like but then if I see all these different things that people are working on what is the thing that could hold all of it um well it does it feel to you a little like a co-working space well interestingly um it's both no wait I don't know how to explain this um I love to go so what I notice is the kind of conversation that's going on is open and soft in a way people are open and soft for each other yeah um in a co-working space often it's heady and busy and people are trying to really strongly convince you of what they're doing so I was in this co-working space before and the first conversation what you have is oh what are you doing and then the person answers to me yes we are building this tool for doing this and that and it's about yes and we are and it ends up in a level like it's a very busy mind thing and people are really like activated in a way that for me in the end doesn't feel pleasant at all and I noticed that most when a group of philosophers and and um artists entered a space for an evening activity and they had the space for themselves and I felt the space completely calming down it was like easy and simple and and open and I loved that space and I think Jerry has kind of a balance of those different elements and it makes it so tricky as well because in that balance it's not something you can actually define clearly so I think that's also part of the space is that he um he tries to balance giving people space to speak but he also names things in such a way he affirms in a positive way he like whenever someone finished speaking he gives associations and in that way affirming and giving value to what a person has been saying and underlying I think people kind of want this kind of value from the conversation they want to be seen and heard in what they're really doing so I think that's a fundamental meaning of what's going on but if you would ask them directly I don't know if people acknowledge it yes yes I agree I agree um yeah well there's there's uh there's also power in telling things like that to people who you're not very close to you know like it's if you if you're gonna share some idea that you're not quite sure about it's easier sometimes with people that you don't really know very well than it is with someone who who's very close to you because if they reject the idea then it's it's harder it's harder to hear yeah so yeah so a lower level or a sub-level is okay we have to deal with we are dealing with a group of people with a lot of insecurities and they're not sharing them directly you can hear it kind of in their in their tone of conviction about some things I guess like oh I really want this to happen I see so much value in it and so I have to talk with more conviction about what I'm doing but I think most of the people are talking quite calmly about stuff so it's that's nice but one does it shift in the moments that when do people start bumping into each other I'm not sure it's also me by the way I notice in the call sometimes I bump into the conversation like uh my question is indeed then like where is this heading what are we really doing and what what do we want I try to grasp what's there but it's impossible to grasp what's there because it's so so many layers at the same time as well I don't know do you think that that when Plato and Socrates were sitting out on the steps in the in the courtyard and people were sitting around and they were talking where they you know what was there was there a focus on what what this should be what what are we doing here you know all of that but I think yeah I think if you suppose that Jerry is Plato then then I think Jerry does have a aim and something he wants to do in life he wants to get somewhere what what is yeah he wants to turn this into into a viable you know a viable thing with an income stream for some people who are able to to make this their work um yeah I well and I wonder how many of us see one of the things I don't know um what's his name Bentley Bentley is working on this software well I hear people saying that all the time I'm doing this project now and I'm thinking is that something you're doing in your spare time or is that your job or or you know like what I don't understand is well startups often don't have an income in the beginning well yes but but but still is that their is that their thing or is that a side project because you know I you know I just wonder how many for me to help someone else I would have to to stop my job or stop my personal projects and put their personal projects in place and most of my day is spent doing my work like my paid for work graphic design stuff that I do and then there's this little time that I have that I can work on my own stuff and when someone is saying you know we really need to work on this big problem I think I don't care about it enough or or it's too big or that feels like well that's what I would be doing for the next 10 years yeah but I don't want to do that for the next 10 years I don't want to do their thing for the next yeah but of course but I don't think people are not literally inviting you to do their project they are just convinced of what they're doing and that that matters I also hear certain people repeating the same kind of conversation over different weeks it's it's about mainly the same topic and that's really going on for them and I like it that they get uh so part of me likes that they get like a forum for what they're doing and even if it's like repetition it doesn't really matter because it's about them and what they're doing and they can be heard and that's the cafe kind of part yeah what what I noticed and I was telling another group about this I think I mentioned this to you as well at one point I'm not sure was that I have my vision my vision and when I say it I'm thinking about it as I'm saying it and I'm changing it just a little bit when I say it to you and then when I say it to Vincent and then two weeks from now Eric comes back and he says hey could you tell us a little about yourself and I say it again but it's a little different and what I'm doing is I'm evolving my message I'm evolving my vision and what I realized was that if I am in a room by myself and say my vision out loud it doesn't do the same thing but if there's another person it it it forces me to think about what I'm saying and the vision changes it gets a little better it gets a little better I hear Klaus he can say his vision now so fast so clearly and before it used to take him 20 minutes to try to say it and now he's just he's got it because he's been saying it over and over and he's faster he's clearer it's more concise he knows more what he wants and I think that to me is a lot of the value of people every week doing their little check-in and every couple months having to explain who they are and what they're interested in I think it's that yes it is about them to your point yeah and it's about me when I when I talk about my stuff I want to be here heard from me and I'm trying to balance also like okay then how do I bring in value for other people so I'm trying to also do that so let's say it in a way that somebody else might have something so I'm trying to estimate what parts can I name that are interesting enough for the group to hear and I wonder how other people do that but that's not really the point I think it's more about okay I'm sharing my stuff trying to make it interesting for the group and for me I notice it's short to really make a significant difference for me if I share about my stuff I'd like to go much deeper even with what I'm working on yes and it doesn't mean that the check-ins are bad it's just that I have a deeper need than just doing check-ins as well and and at the same time I notice it's so difficult to convey so many different parts of what I'm working on like somebody else told I heard through somebody else that somebody said about me in the call oh Eric he's doing everything it's how people look at me that and I'm kind of understanding that they're saying this about me and I can hear it from perspective of okay so I'm a bit vague and wishy washy in my explanations and people don't really get a sense of what I'm about so they say that I'm very general so that's that's one voice speaking and another voice is like yeah but that's actually true I am working on the largest scale and on a bigger vision and that for me matters and that's also the reason why I come to these OGM calls is because I have this vision I meet other people with similar kind of visions so there is a voice in me already kind of a bit afraid of how will people look at me how will people see me in my wildness in in what I'm doing and then when I said like yeah give me three hundred thousand dollars and I will change the world profoundly then people are really appreciative up after and that's nice to notice this kind of atmosphere and I don't know what I wonder if because Jerry is difficulty also maybe getting money for what he's doing that also seeps into the call and maybe for different people as well there is this built-up frustration of not being able to make a living with this and that there's this tiredness growing and combined with COVID tiredness like it's going on for a long time now so that's not easy either and then there's this thing about I want meaning and I want this to mean something for me but I think oh so then if I look at the level of people just contributing and just doing this small check-in being kind of like being in the bar together after a long work week and it's people from different jobs but there's this this pub where everything everyone meets every week that's kind of nice to relax and relieve a bit but then there's there's this two opposite tensioned fields which are really interesting in a way like the wanting to get things done and wanting to be heard and wanting to be received in a hard space there again I don't know I'm rehashing also now it seems like not really getting further but it's helping me to name these things to get a clear picture on what makes sense and I wonder how many people in the call are struggling with what they're doing and struggling heavily like in a way the heaviness could be of like what you named like it's heavy stuff it's wicked problems they don't solve easily do we need to name our feelings about it do we need to bring it into the space like oh I'm really struggling here I've been doing this project for five years for 10 years for 20 years I haven't made much progress or is that going to make the space more heavy even I don't think it will actually I think it's an interesting idea because at that point you're looking for validation you're looking for encouragement you're looking for people other people to say I've been working on a problem myself for five years and so that to me is what I had experienced in co-working it wasn't a startup incubator it was a it was a co-working space meaning we were all working on our own things our own companies but just at separate desks in one big room and it was the it was being among and with other people and sometimes you would talk about hey I'm going to lunch where do you recommend and sometimes you would ask so what is it that you work on and so you know it was just you never knew what it was about but it was it was always you know it was just being in a space with with other people um how did you feel in that space I welcomed it it was good because I could go there and not necessarily talk to anyone but I could hear other people talking or I could engage with people and it was just nice to there's a difference when you're working at home and you're you're slogging away on things and if you're working in a space like that oh there's other people who are also working away by themselves you know struggling with their own things I had read a little story this morning about a guy who was writing a book by himself at home for five years and he didn't know any other writers he didn't it wasn't a subject his family was interested in and you know he had another job but he was just something he was working on and he got he ended up getting the story went he ended up getting a a key to a room in the back of the New York Public Library and there were only a dozen keys because there were a dozen desks and they were given out to special people and so they were authors who were working on things and you would go back to this room and there was 12 desks and there was 12 somewhat notable people working on their own projects and this guy came in there he was he was still in awe of some of the people who happened to be there and they asked him one of them asked him well what are you working on oh i'm working on this book how long have you been working on it and he said five years and the other person said oh it took me nine years to write this one and then another person asked him the same question and they had this was later on and they said oh yeah yeah it was seven years for me and it gave him hope because he thought five years was maybe too long like he had crossed over and he would never finish and hearing those stories he realized oh you know i still have another couple couple years maybe in this but but there's an end and and it was inspiring just to talk to someone and hear their own experience i noticed this is my reality right now coming into the ogm group was kind of on an edge of like i need other people doing this because i can't bear it anymore that i meet people doing the same thing but it's still challenging because it's so many ideas and so many different approaches and like oh if if i look at what i'm doing am i doing the right thing or maybe i have to do so much more research and it will prove that my idea is not worth it or and the other ideas like oh maybe i will fuck up and it's kind of like all these feelings and emotions came together and then my personal life was getting challenging also or it's been challenging for a while though but i think there's something about that like my own feeling of heaviness i think i might also bring it in the call myself which i'm not it's not a guilty thing but more like an awareness thing and um so i'm like i imagine other people having a similar thing and i know some people have it like how how do we do this as ogm um i like to like i noticed when you give a bit of perspective then it changes the mood a bit but it was just a bit in that moment i think as well you know when you name the these are wicked problems we don't solve it that easily so we're all working on our own thing then you give like a perspective that lightens the atmosphere a bit and i think if if anything we can do for um or ogm i wonder like you could say i find it find the right goal that we can cross together but it could also be this heaviness management i wonder like just trying to be atmosphere managers um is another part of it i would say i agree that jerry has a gift in that he knows when the when the group wants to be heavier and when the group wants to be lighter his his facilitation skills are excellent that way yeah today i wasn't prepared at all i think i would have if i would have prepared it then i would have approached it in a way that i i tried to bring really value for everyone in the call right now i just was curious in introductions and i wanted for send this introduction and i hoped it would have lasted 20 minutes but then it lasted an hour or something with a conversation of food systems in between yeah no one is no one is faulting you for that at all no but i'm also so i'm not feeling guilty but i'm more like trying to figure out what does the group need that's my interest and i could feel it during the call as well like what does this group really need and that's i think that's what we're talking about right yeah yeah i agree because it relates to who's showing up and who keeps showing up well they're getting something that they need yeah but it's also shifting i mean i i see if i see the last calls that i've been on it's been different people that show up it's not the same every week some people like you it's been a while in a certain moment it was a while and now i'm back so well i i went away for a while because i wasn't getting what i needed out of it it was it was something that my brain was filled with other people's problems after every call and during a time when when we were all quarantined that was okay it was kind of fun it was a distraction it was like watching a spy movie where the world is ending but it's not it's not your problem to solve you can watch them try to struggle with it and um when i noticed i so i i took some time and went away from it and even just watching the emails i thought there's it's waking up all these little areas that i don't really want to care about because i don't have the space i'm trying to solve problems that are my own and i just didn't have the space for it um because like you i think they all sound interesting oh yeah okay you want to talk about that okay yeah yeah and then it's like all that this this my part of my brain is now full of all these ideas and and it just took me off of my uh well i believe in incubation as a creative tool but incubation is best when you loaded up with relevant stuff and then you know you sleep and you wake and you sleep and you wake and over time things develop and i had all these things that weren't helping i needed to not listen to the other people's problems that way yeah but i i had a similar thing like when i say it's mentally overwhelming it's also kind of listening to intense topics in a way like food system collapsed that's like uh if i think about it i can get just completely depressed if i don't watch out but it's also uh a high level solve exercise which i can find interesting or not and it's something about it i'm not sure some people are easier with holding a lot of different ideas at the same time and they can switch easily from one another i think chariot himself can do it more easily than me for instance um but i i also think that there's a whole group of people and they might have similar experiences because i share with you with filled with other people's problems it's kind of it's not their personal problems but it's what they're in their work what they're struggling with in their work and what you're trying to figure out so and it's the same for me i was full like after a converse like after an ogm call i couldn't sleep or something before and now it seems like i start to find another approach and my brain starts to better digest it in a way that's also because i take more space and i don't work that much on what i'm working on but it's it is though in a way a group of very similar people that was once very very similar things in a way because they're their approach is very different but somehow they might also want like it's this this camaraderie on working on same level and some one part of it is that that's like a recurring thing in workshops often is oh this is the way to solve it this is the way to solve the biggest problems like the silver bullet thing i've i've noticed that in in other conferences and workshops that that's something i want to avoid but i don't necessarily know how to avoid it how to say yeah let's maybe it's easy just say yeah we're working on different levels and different approaches but i think all our approaches are worth pursuing or something because we're working on a level that matters all of us all of our work matters and it's very different so we might not agree but it still matters all of it's kind of this thing but i'm going for dinner i'm gonna prepare myself some dinner for you it's noon i guess your mic is muted 130 so just about yeah so okay thanks god for digesting a bit together with me yes absolutely and uh see you next time i'll see you later yeah absolutely have a good week you too