 This is the OGM weekly call on Thursday, August 11th, 2022. I'm going to turn the transcript on as well. How is everybody? Pretty good. You all right? I'm OBE, OBE, which is overwhelmed by events. Oh, I thought you just made a member of the Order of the British Empire. That'd be pretty cool. Can you arrange that? I don't have that much suck at court. I would settle for other courts, the Estonian courts perhaps. There you go. Yeah. In fact, I have no suck at court. I don't think I could find it on a map. Hi, Grace. I'm on hold with my credit card company trying to figure out some security things. So hopefully I'll be with you 100% in a minute. Well, that's sort of only half pleasant for you. Yeah. I've had a going back and forth with PNC now since January, trying to set up autopay on a mortgage that wouldn't set up. And so it's finally, I think fixed, but it's like back and forth. Marshall, good to see you. Hey, Jerry. Thanks, London. Rick as well. There's a conversation brewing today is a topic week, so it's not a check-in week. We won't go through the Partridge family windows in front of me, but rather there's been a topic bubbling up. I think that's the Brady family windows, not the Partridge family, Jerry. I was like close enough to the, I didn't watch enough of those to have it like right at hand. So I shot for Partridge and I met Holly with squares. Right. Yeah. And in fact, I used to have a zoom background that had me, like they had the squares around behind me. In the early zoom days when that was actually even mildly funny. Zoom no longer being a matter for humor now being our prison, our modern prison, but it's a prison that liberates because look, I get to talk to all of you like on a regular basis. And we don't live near each other. So there's a question burbling around, which is should OGM have a purpose? Does OGM have a purpose? What kinds of things should OGM engage in? What could OGM do best? In conversations over the last two plus years, we have wrestled with this at different times in different sub conversations in different ways. And so I think it'd be interesting to peel the question open and see if we can't address the question in some way that leaves us with a couple of paths of inquiry or with a couple of sort of insights. I don't know if we can answer the question here, but I wanted to share. I wanted to share from my brain for a second, just a little bit of inspiration and then open the floor up to see how we want to structure this. But here's my thought for today's call. And here's a thought that I created some time ago. In fact, I created this June 2021. And it was under sort of OGM objectives. And I actually had another nice thought called OGM effects if we succeed, which I can come back to in a second, but I will also give everybody a link to, in fact, right this minute. So you can wander around by yourselves, give you a link to this thought in my brain. So feel free to open that in your own browser. But let me just explain what I have here and then go back to the call. And this is the ambitious wish list of what an open global mind community might engage in. Right. So, and I'll kind of jump around a bit, but we had a bunch of conversations about the generative commons. About what the notion of creating a generative comment so we might actually nurture generative commons in different places, which would mean things like mapping sharing and connecting kind of everything or causing things to be connected and mapped meaning if we could catalyze a bunch of different communities into meeting in a global mind. That would be pretty cool. OGM could become a bridge for the high-functioning entities out in the world, organizations, nonprofits, for-profit startups that are already working on all parts of collective intelligence but working on them in lots of different dissipated separate places. So that would be a really interesting thing to do. We could bring emotional intelligence to political and other charged debate. I think it's a really good idea to have an effect of participating, of doing some of the other things but bringing also sort of the heart. And per Charles Blassen's suggestion long ago, I got the domain open global heart.com or.org. I'm forgetting which one, but we also have that in case that's useful. Help-wise initiatives connect and amplify their reach, which is connected to the bridge of the high-functioning entities. But it's like, how do we find wise initiatives that can connect and amplify? And Rick, you had something on the OGM list that I think is somewhere in this realm, but I want to come back to you to see if I can understand better what you were talking about as launch pads. Honor increased diversity in all we affect. And in fact, I don't have on this list something that I think I've been talking about. But I think that is B of aid to communities not like us. So that I will add that here in a second. I'm host experiments and challenges of different kinds in order to pioneer. Let me connect this back to. Pioneer new needed practices for collaborative sense making. I think that's connected to. Prototype missing pieces so. Recording in progress. There we go. So basically host experiments and challenges. Identify missing pieces in the knowledge web. Sort of point out where things might be missing. Make wisdom easier to use. Which is a big one for me. It's this idea of how do we instrument wisdom so that they're easier to understand and set in motion. And here I have a thought that I created. There's the one two four all. I will have to come back here because I've got a page that. On the relate wiki. Where I talk about how do we turn this pattern into an actual bit of code that would help us in zoom, for example. So let me go back here. We talked about those pioneer new needed practices for collaborative sense making. Let me connect that to. Collaborative sense making. Present visions of OGM a futures. Which I think is important here. Another one is promote idea sex. Which is how. How do people do that? Which is how. How do people with ideas actually exchange ideas and improve them. Another way of thinking about this is how do you swap DNA. With wise organizations or how do you help wise organizations swap their own DNA. Somebody might have figured out a good way to crack and monitor and reward value exchange through a network. Great. How do you fold that into the four, the pieces that you're using and then. I think that's it. I think those are all the nodes that I had put in here before. Let me stop the share. And. And see what anybody thinks and maybe. Maybe Rick, if you want to start us off a little bit by riffing on what you would said and whether or not. It fits into the things I was just showing and. If so, how, what, where, et cetera. Yeah, I was using that the idea of a launching. It is an aggregator of people who want to focus on a particular area. I mean, I have a particular. I'm sure everyone else has a particular area, but how you can make networks around those particular things. And the idea of a launching pad is to have some sort of. Either academy community micro community, which can expand over time. And, you know, taking it from a complexity perspective, you know. How do you, how do you create your sort of mycelium network. That can weave together a social tapestries and ways that we can actually take on these wicked problems. These self-inflicted wicked problems. I like, I liked that a lot. That seems very, it seems to me very resonant with conversations we've had before with some of the things that just showed on screen. Are you comfortable with that? Are the big pieces missing? Not much, it's not nothing missing. It's more enhancing and sort of thinking about where you might have sort of more concentrated areas, which would be long-term activities rather than projects, which tend to be, you do a project, you finish it. I'm thinking of a cause that there are causes that we take on, where there is no end because the problems, you know, wicked problems don't go away. You're going to continuously trying to work around, you know, to make sure that you have that kind of structure. So that's it. Thanks, Rick. And you're also reminding me of something that I'm trying to sort of visualize and explain, which is the difference between a mission for a project, which is long-term and works over time, which I sometimes talk about as painting as a mosaic. And Wendy McLean talks about as a tapestry and others of us may use different kinds of metaphors for, but then how do you decompose that into what I call tiles because of the mosaic analogy, which I like a lot, and you decompose that into tiles, which are in fact time-bounded, parsable, separable, modular, composable, et cetera, et cetera. So how do you preserve, how do you have the long-term continuity and vision of mission and painting of something larger that you're trying to get done over time, but then still make it. I think that is Mike's, oh no, that's Doug's, I think it's Doug. Doug, if you will mute, I think that was coming from your computer, but I'm not sure. Grace, you have your hand up. I want to point out that this moment is that the problem and the question are framed in a way that are hard to address. And a lot of times just ask yourself, what's the problem that you're trying to address? What are the ways that are hard to address? And a lot of times just asking the right question really makes the conversation go somewhere. And in some ways, this isn't the truth, but in some ways one way I'm interpreting this question is, wow, we've been meeting for a while and I'm not sure anything is really coming out of this group and who, well, what would that look like, right? And I'm not sure that's a great problem definition. I feel like I want to define the question that you're asking better, Jerry, before we start answering it. And you're reminding me, Grace, thank you that also several people have expressed, hey, I love this community just the way it is. And we get together and we mix stuff around and I meet people I trust and that's just fine. And I'm not trying to break that with this particular inquiry. And I think that there are some of us in the group. There are a bunch of us in the group, as Rick just said, who have our own projects. We're trying to get a boost, a lift or a fix or some support or even participants or funding. Awesome. There's a bunch of us who are just here for the ideas and the camaraderie because we care about the topic. And there's a few of us, and I don't know how big that number is among us, but what percentage it is, who would just like to get on some project and really put a bunch of effort into something that we can fix is some piece of this larger and some piece of this larger vision. And I'd love to make and we have time and space being limited only at time and space are limited. We could in fact have lots of different subgroups doing things that are very substantive and very, very much on, you know, project plans and so forth. And that need and change the Thursday calls or other sorts of rhythms we have in the group. We could easily coexist. And then the energy of those things could come back in and feed us here in this place. Also, I just want to sort of acknowledge that we've been talking for a long time. We're not a fabulous group at getting a lot of things sort of done in the world and I will carry that a lot. I love convening. I'm not a really great producer, operations person or whatever else. And we've done some lovely work in lots of places. I feel like we've digested and metabolized and synthesized a bunch of things that matter to this space. Because I feel like my understanding of and image of and desires for this space of a shared civilizational memory of some sort have gotten way further than when we started this series of conversations concurrent with lockdown. So that's working really well for me. But thanks for putting that in that conversation. Klaus. Yeah, one. One thing I'm struggling with here is the dynamics that are in the system right now. So I can just talk about food and agriculture and in my food system sector here. But right now the US government, for example, just allocated out of nowhere $20 billion to assign to conservation districts. There's no system in place to distribute this money quickly and fairly. Because the folks who are focused on regenerative agriculture and community-based systems and so on are completely unprepared. On the other hand, you look at corporations, Darry's and K4 operators and so on. They have game clients on the shelf. They are preparing for this thing. So like it always happens, there's money coming in from the government and it's being mocked up before it reaches the intended audience, which in this case will be startup farmers, community-based businesses and what have you. So it is very difficult to establish a communication structure and an organizational structure that is not able to then deal with these changes where you can just jump to here's the next challenge to focus on. And I don't know how to develop that. I mean, I have a meeting, in fact, right after this one here with the American Sustainable Business Network, and I've alerted the group of saying, you need to think about this. We generate America in case of the ground and all, how are we going to deal with this? Because now, as you go, this is the Donnelly Meadows hierarchy dissolving into ever more complex parts of the economy, each community has totally unique issues related to restoring the environment, watershed, soil repair and forestry and so on. And so the conservation programs are super customized towards very specific local issues that you need to deal with. And so if these programs are not keyed up and prepped, they're completely going to miss the window that is opening up now to appeal for this kind of funding. That's just like one example, right? How the landscape around you is constantly shifting and changing and how dynamic this all is. So to share information, to be able to share information across platforms, to highlight these kind of aha moments, right? Here's the next thing to focus on. That is a service. I mean, that's good stuff. So correct, tell me if I'm paraphrasing you poorly here, but I wrote in the chat, how can we, how might we identify systemic failures and seek to improve them? And there's probably a much nicer way of saying that, but partly you're describing a couple of different kinds of high level failures in the food, agriculture, regeneration kind of a space between government budgets and farmers on the ground. And there's lots of other things there. And we've, in all of our conversations, we've seen how complicated each of these different segments and sectors is, but having like an eagles view with a systemic eco, an ecosystemic brain that understands how to look at these sorts of things, in which case I'm using brain, not as the software, but just like mind. I think that would be really helpful. Does that, I mean, and then it gets specific when you talk about food and agriculture and farming and all that, but is that the more, is that a general description of what you're saying, Klaus? Yeah, I wouldn't necessarily call it systems failure. It's just the system isn't ready to morph into this new reality that's just unfolded and adapt itself to here's what's now happening. And there's a limited time table to deal with it. I mean, the United, the conservation districts, I mean, let me just digress for a moment because I had this great moment in the last webinar that I organized for that moderated. There are over 3,000 conservation districts in the United States, the county of America. And that was formed during Roosevelt's regime during the 1930s during the Great Dust Bowl. When American farmers needed science support and also funding resources to recover from this enormous failure. Well, these are still in place, but they have been defunded to the point where they are becoming marginally useful. But this system could be mobilized and scaled up again on really short notice if provided that everybody understands what they're doing and what their mission is and engage here. So there is now a hyper community-level engagement required which I'm trying to set up here in Bend in my community to bring the city council and everybody into motion of saying you need to grab this opportunity here as it unfolds and you need to jump ahead of the curve. So that's not necessarily a systems failure but it is the need for a systems adaptation that was unexpected or should have been expected but it was unexpected and it's not being prepared for. Thank you. I like that a lot. And also I suspect that there are a lot of high functioning organizations out there that are relics of some other movement that survived some squishing of bureaucracy that whatever like seed banks or who knows what else. There used to be the Civilian Conservation Corps that did really interesting work. But I'm thinking of the farm credit system actually was really, really important during the depression and then morphed into something else that was still high functioning I think later and I don't know. But how do we find the high functioning elements of the system and improve their role in the system? Something like that? I'm trying to generalize a little bit. Let's go Marshall Doug Gill. Hello. I have only recently begun participating here but as I look at it from the outside coming in it feels important to me to be thinking about what the what the unique contributions that this group could make are and what some of its unique strengths are. And it feels to me like the tools and the paradigm and the brand and the experience of connected knowledge and people with connections are something that have been building here for years and offer an opportunity for the group to play a catalyst type role across a wide range of loosely related interdisciplinary organizations seeking to build a more networked, sustainable world. And, you know, I mean, that could mean a lot of different things but my mind always goes to let's all chip in and hire an ombudsman type role to go out and do the work to connect to other organizations and bring all of this historical network knowledge to help amplify the seeing and the thinking and the doing of all kinds of related organizations. Marshall, thank you. And you're reminding me of conversations we had early in OGM's history about what we call the outreach and one of the questions that Burr built up immediately in terms of, hey, we'd like to reach out to high-functioning organizations or whatever else was okay, great. So what do we tell them we bring? What secrets do we bring? What is our secret sauce? What is our special magic? And we kind of stumbled on that a bit because we don't have a platform that they can use. We don't have a methodology they could adopt. We've got people of goodwill with geek gifts, as Eric said in the chat, with a lot of insights, but we haven't organized that in a way that's really easy to absorb or transmit, which could easily be a goal of ours. And again, I want to say I may be putting two biggest set of goals in front of us, given that we are a community of practice that likes to meet in salon format on Thursdays and then a bunch of sub-conversations that are trying to do things, but I'd love to aim high. I'd love to see how much we can get done. I wonder if the organization or representatives of it could act as consulting historians to organizations that seeks to support. I like that. Historians is sort of one of the perspectives and I think the systems perspective, ecosystem thinking perspective is another perspective. And there's a couple of different things like that. Lenses that we can offer, plus tools and practices. And I think Pete and I are big proponents of a whole bunch of things or practice, not necessarily tool. It's how you get a community together to do things in unison and in some way that we're agreed on doing. And I think lots of others of us care about that as well. Thanks Marshall. Doug, then Gil, then Doug. Doug Breitbart first, sorry. You are muted. There you go. You found the, found the button. Sorry about that. What, what, well, one micro thing class in your share, which is this money is allocated. Everybody goes, hooray. The substantive real deal, not ready yet. Distributed grassroots node to node folks. Aren't set up. And the commercial interests see it as, here's another huge pot of gold to siphon. And they are set up to do that out of the government, you know, out of programs, whether aligned with the programs, aspirations, intentions or not. Right. And so that's, you know, how that black wolf keeps getting fed and perpetuating itself. But on a larger sort of pulling back into space, really back into space. There is an aggregate. Capacity in the room. In this group. To really be able to put arms around really big, complex realities. Both on a on the nitty gritty Jerry of your brain. So, you know, down to the granular level and pulling back, pulling back into, you know, buckets, subject matter domains and buckets. And, and. And with everybody's reference based knowledge base awareness. And all of the accumulated references and links and artifacts awareness of artifacts and, and preexisting stuff. Could be aggregated into a platform where the mission isn't to create a specific problem. It's to actually do a massively multivariate. Aggregation of all of the stakeholders and all of the elements that could be identified. And there's almost an AI dimension to this. Of having a broad enough reference space. And the, the, the, a platform that builds. The lexicon around a particular issue in a particular location for a particular population. In real time. And, and that's a. That's sort of a living thing that is within reach technologically. We have the capacity to do, to put those pieces in place. We have the capacity to do batch. Uploading and integration into a master base, a master reference data set. And we have the beginning emergencies of AI capacity to do the pattern matching. And that's sort of, you know, we have the capacity of looking out at the carrot. That's gras beneath our hooves that's already present and accounted for from an ingredient standpoint. If there was a collective will or, or a group of people were interested in actually operationalizing it, putting a stake in the ground. So I throw that out. As a contribution. Thanks. And Marshall put into the chat. The purpose system that you and being in systems have as a, as a good example for what to do, which I totally missed that road for a second. So thank you. Gil, then Doug be Doug see then grace. Yeah. Good morning, everybody. Good evening grace. I like what Doug said. I want to return to that in a moment, but first to comment on what class had said earlier class. I was really struck by what you said about folks aren't ready to receive the flow of resources that's coming at them, except some folks are very ready and have contingency plans on the shelf. And it's easy to dismiss that as a matter of resources like, you know, they've got departments that do that. And we, and we don't, we're all just, you know, kind of getting by each day, but it's also an orientation. And I think, you know, given that we are in a world that is going to be changing a lot fast all the time. Developing the capacity to anticipate the things that might be coming and be somewhat prepared for them be prepared to jump into action on things on, you know, true surprises or perhaps expectable surprises, I think is a really important talent and capacity to cultivate. So thanks for that class. Back to what Doug was saying, I think you spoke a version of what was in my mind. As I think about what our purpose is here, I'm not here looking for a new project. I'm one of the people who's got project pretty busy. But yeah, I keep coming here even though I'm busy because there's something going on here that's of enormous richness and value for me. And Jerry, I kind of listened to your overview in four dimensions, four tendencies that I hear in this, in this bunch of humans. One is an inclination to want to solve everything. It's kind of one end of the poll. The second is to be useful to people who are working on cool stuff that we care about. A third is to be a value to each other in the things that we're each working at. And the fourth is to be pub where we gather together and not to minimize that because I'll speak for me, but I'll speak for all of us. We are all changed by these conversations. We are different people by virtue of being in these conversations than if we weren't. So from the most action, let's fix everything. The least action which is to hang out and talk, there's value all across that spectrum. I don't know where to put us in that. I'm completely satisfied if this is just the pub that shifts us each a little bit and enriches our lives a little bit. So I'm not inclined to trying to solve everything. But in between, you know, being of service to each other and being of service to others are interesting challenges. And on the being of service to each other, I like the stake that Doug stuck in the ground just now as a possible conversation to explore further. That's it. Thank you. Doug C. When I speak here, I usually try and impose it on myself the discipline of only saying things that might possibly be helpful to the whole group. And it defeats me this morning because I can't think of what that would be. We're a bunch of smart people that are just spread all over the place. And as a result, we're not very strategic about what we're doing. And maybe that's who we are. I think Gil's view that this could be the pub is real. Whether we could do more than that is still iffy. I'd love to think of what it would be. One of the problems right now is that new institutes are springing up all over the place in reaction to the multiple crises. Every university is creating new departments of ecological development. We're in a context where all the things we might think of doing, somebody's already doing. So where is the strategic lever at all those? My own sense is, if you look at the whole landscape, that the lever, and I've said this before, the leverage point that's available is the algorithms that are going to be used to manage society in a crisis. And this group could possibly with its multiple connections out into the Silicon Valley and finance worlds, have some impact on the way the algorithms develop. Are they going to be used as they are now to heighten tensions? Or are they going to be used to moderate solutions? One of the things, the context for me is the building tension with China, which is just stupid. The U.S. is acting like it's a failing Hegemon that has to fight for territory rather than working cooperatively with China. And we're very close to a bad war. Things like that. Can this group even have a strategic view about such things? I just don't know. Anyway, I don't want to run on because I think it's clear that I'm not clear. Doug, thank you for your clear unclarity. That was actually really helpful for me in a couple different ways. Before I go to Grace, I just wanted to put a couple things in the conversation. One is, I think I sort of said a little moment ago, everywhere you look in the problem space that we're in, somebody is doing interesting and great work. I don't find a lot of people with an overarching view or vision for how these things fit together nicely and what a civilizational memory might look like. When I start talking about language, it's crickets. It's like, whoa, I don't see where that is. And I bump into a few people here and there who got that in mind but don't necessarily have an organization or whatever else. But the weaving together of these things into some distributed, capable, reliable, trustworthy, helpful, useful memory and prototyping breadboard and whatever else it could be, I don't necessarily see that that's happening. But again, if you wanted to go talk about distributed identity, if you wanted to go talk about mapping and all those things, there's lots of interesting community work being done and all those kinds of things. And then I have a strong view and desire to live in and be the Chuck Yeager of this new memory like infrastructure, scaffolding, whatever you call it. I call it the big fungus now and then. But I don't know how much my particular view or vision of that overlaps with everyone here and with what OGM is. I actually don't really know that. And I haven't been able to externalize that vision other than rifts in conversations here and a couple essays here and there. And then putting a whole bunch of stuff in my brain, which is sort of famous by security. Sorry, Mark, I'm going to mute you for a second. So I'm trying to sort of figure that out a little bit because I sort of see this thing pretty vividly. I've got a pretty vivid picture of what could be and how it could influence education and science and journalism and all that kind of stuff. And I and we have a tremendous number of connections into all those spaces. I mean, we just know a whole bunch of people who are doing important stuff in all those areas. And if we could kind of release the crock and if you'll forgive me the expression of human wisdom and compassion so that we could help each other, I think is a really big thing sitting right there that we could help tip toward connectivity, toward reliability, trustworthiness, all those kinds of things. And we're kind of touching all the moving parts that are needed to solve for that problem. Grace, then Rick, then Doug C. Wow, every time somebody talks I have a different thing. But I think happens to me too. Yeah. Which is why we love these conversations. So I've been aware of this lately that I come to these conversations. I went to a similar conversation in a different group. And that people aren't really all, you know, we're all working on our separate projects. They're not all of us. It's quite a large number of us. And we're looking at like projects and objects and maybe. So like there's there's sort of things that that so there's things that like if we're just a pub, right? Then we're just a pub, but there's also something like can we one of the things that's really bothering me is waste, right? And duplicated effort. And can we at least be an organ that says, Hey, you guys are doing mapping. And these 20 other organizations are doing mapping. And by the way, the answer to that so far is no. Right. Because there is a mapping group and I've like plugged in stuff. And there is pretty weak receptors for this maybe a duplicate effort. And why don't you just join hands with some other people? Right. So we have pretty weak receptors for that kind of like, you know, Hey, Jerry's got this great vision. It's like, yeah, well, that sounds a little like the Consilience project. Couldn't you just call up Dan, just talk to Berger and see if you're doing the same thing. And like, I don't know what the receptors are for that. Right. So that's one thing like is like, are we in any way committed to. Trying to. Eliminate duplicate effort or just tell our members, Hey, I think that project might be a waste of time. Maybe we should put your efforts into something else. Right. Like we have, I think we have no taste for that at this point. But I think that would be a minimum thing we could do for one another is just be really straight and be like, Hey, guys. You know, we're going to have an intervention because you guys are going off on a tangent spend a lot of that might be something. And what would that look like? Right. What was the council of people? Like, what would you have to do? What would be the procedure for saying, Hey, let's stop those guys going off on that tangent over there. If that were something we wanted to do, or maybe we're just like, Hey, let them. Who cares? They're drinking too much over there, whatever. But this also brings me to this thing. Like maybe what we're doing is a kind of, maybe what's interesting is the flow. I was, I was, I was. Looking at CRM this week and we use a, we use a project management tool and the project management tool was arguing that it's a CRM tool, but actually it does that as management. You know, these things are really complex and it's just not designed right. So, but maybe where maybe mapping those flows would make a lot of sense. Like this is what a good project definition looks like. Okay. You know, if you fill this out, we'll understand what you're up to Jerry, if you fill this out, we'll understand what you're up to and which resources to plug into your thing. And then once we've started to plug those in, it would kind of know that step one looks like this and step and like kind of a, you know, something that helps us move those flow, but really map those flows of the project rather than something that does the project feels to me like it's in line and Kevin's got a really like something that actually is more like a CRM. This is what the flow looks like from ideation to funding to execution. And we are your accountability buddies in the flow. That might be really cool because I think that would also eliminate this kind of duplication of effort wasting because we wouldn't have to do an intervention. We'd be like, okay, look, I'm looking at your project definition and I see no, no, no, no, no, and you don't have their objectives or whatever it is. So I feel like that's kind of that idea of a flow of supporting one another's project might pass. Thanks, Grace. The meta project has a sub project about maps and mapping that Vincent and Wendy McClain are in and a bunch of people have been attending, which is trying to collect up information that would feed some of some of this. Pete and others have this belief that everything is a project, which I like a lot and when we haven't made that a rigorous part of our process or anything like that. And then I'm reminded of some high functioning processes or methods that exist in other communities like the writer's workshop process, in which a bunch of writers share their works with each other. They pay attention to one work at a time. That author steps out of the circle and the work is addressed, not the author in order to not be critical of the author. Like, wow, what a stupid person had this idea. But instead, there's a process that you step through to say, this is what I think that idea wanted to be. And this is what would make it more of that and then answer questions and so forth. And it's a process that is different from an intervention metaphorically as you would with somebody who's got an addiction or whatever else. But I think if we picked a couple of these and had just a place for these things to stand up and whoever wanted to step into one of those circles for a particular set of projects could then join forces. One thing I think we do moderately well and very informally is mix people together who want to talk. Because we hear somebody say, oh, I've got a project that whatever. And we're like, hey, I've known two people in the past who were doing that. And you want to talk or maybe even some of us can convene that conversation and say, hey, why don't four of us meet in the zooms and talk about it. And I've seen some coalescing connecting through that. But this is a little bit like the world of philanthropy where you scratch five philanthropists and they've got six different projects, huge overlaps, but not that willing to collaborate or fold their projects together. They like having their projects. It's a lifestyle business. And I think there's a little bit of that going on here, which is like, hey, we have our vision and our vision is cool to like garden and carry. And I'm certainly guilty of that. And at the end of the day, it's the people who turn those visions into running code and functional communities and whatever else that I think caused the changes that we're looking for. So something like that. So thanks for triggering all that. Rick, Doug C., Stuart, Dave. And I just wanted to say one of the reasons why I show up. And that is because I'm attracted to the idea of sort of the meta-level thinking of looking at things from a visionary perspective. But that's only part of it. It's also a question of how, you know, zooming out and zooming back in and how can you make connections with people? And I'll just tell a brief story because it's emblematic, which things have probably already happened in this group. But I went to a clubhouse group called Global Change Agents and I presented my idea there. It was a brief presentation. And one of the people who were the organizer was a guy called Ed Morrison, who'd written a book on strategic doing. And his take-home message was, you know, Rick, you need to have more partners in what you're trying to do. And so I followed up with him and I said, you know, I'd like you to be my partner. So he was willing to do it. And as a consequence of that, we're in the process. I submitted a conference to a research meeting and I put something in pretty spontaneously, did it over a few days. I thought it's not going to get accepted as a pre-conference workshop. But it did. And the title of the workshop was, is how can we handle the wicked problems of health inequities more effectively? Now you could substitute health inequities with any other because there's lots of wicked problems out there. So it's really, you know, the challenge of dealing with wicked problems. And then on top of that, I'm setting up a series of five Zoom meetings. We're just doing it, just planning it, and it's focusing on the whole notion of what he's developed over his career of using complexity thinking to do strategic doing. Now the interesting thing about his work is that he developed it in university. Now he's disseminating it across different universities. So, you know, in terms of thinking about scalability, having an official affiliation with an institutional center or an academic center, where you develop something that's dealing with complexity, whatever domain you want to, you know, zoom in on, and trying to develop a learning program. So I'll certainly tell Ed about this group and invite him, see if he'll come along and share just a little bit of his work because he's already gone down that, but he's very much at the, he's a doer. I'm a thinker, more of a thinker, and you need thinkers and doers working together, and it's a false dichotomy to say, you know, the people who do don't think and the people who think can't do, it's a false dichotomy. It's a question of how you can bring people with different mindsets together and seeing where you can create your synergies. Thanks, Rick. You're also reminding me that as of, I think yesterday, I'm a fellow at RMIT, which is the, in Melbourne, it's a technology school and they created a senior practitioner fellowship at the Center for Future Skills and Workforce Transformation. That says, our role is to build an innovative learning ecosystem at scale, create new collaborative applied research and invent next generation skills solutions that will catalyze workforce development in the future-oriented industries, crucial to Victoria's economic renewal. If I could just respond to that. Actually, Ed, who had done his career more in the business sector and political sector, he went that back to do a PhD to summarize his life's work at the end of his career and got his degree in Australia, but I'm not sure if it was there or not, but having academic connections is critically important. Indeed. Doug, thanks, Stuart. As I listen, I think one of the models that describes a lot of the people in this group is the commitment to something that we could call an aggregation model. Let's bring together all the resources that we have and see what it adds up to. The problem with an aggregation model is if the strategic ideas are not in the subset, so to speak, they can't be selected into the aggregate. Let me give an example of what I mean by strategic. There's a lot of money in the new Biden bill, a lot. The problem is that it all is to stimulate new economic activity. The problem with new economic activity is it creates more CO2. Hey, there's some logic there. Do we believe in that logic? I just don't know. I think we're going to hold onto our aggregation approach and not move to strategic levels of thinking and to thought. Thanks, Doug. We need to be more and less systematic and rigorous about how we approach these things, which I think would solve a piece of what you're saying, because then we would get the strategies in the aggregate, et cetera, et cetera. Stuart and Dave. I'll try to be brief in making a contribution to the word salad that I'm hearing, and I've got a bit of COVID brain. Pardon me. One of the things that pops up that I'm wondering is, and the metaphor that came up is Jerry, are you the facilitator or the CEO? Okay. And in some sense, the question for you is, what do you want to do? Where do you want to drive this? Because you seem to have a lot of kind of, I hesitate to use the word control, but I'll use it a bit of control over what happens with the dialogue and where it actually goes. And we've been in these wonderful, divergent conversations, and there's a lot of brilliance that's here. And the question is, and I know it's come up, do we want to continue this as a pub and just continue in our wonderful drunken stupor as what happens at pubs, or do we want to bring it into a convergence of some kind so that we can do something that's useful? And one of the thoughts that pops up for me is, every once in a while you will flash Jerry's brain. Okay. Now that could be the essence of something really useful as a resource to a lot of different places, because in some ways it's your harvesting of all of the things that have popped up in these conversations. And you probably more than anybody else have an idea of what's in there and how it might be useful. That's it. That was a whole bunch of stuff, Stuart, thank you. So I clearly don't think of myself as the CEO of this or sort of a similar sort of thing. I do see myself as a shaper of it and instigator of it and I facilitate our conversations here and in so doing help choose the topic, manage the conversation, do whatever else. And that's sort of a part of the structure here. We've tried a couple of experiments with diversifying that a little bit and we haven't really done that much. But the funny thing for me is the thing I've bitten off as the thing I would love to see and do is larger than I can envision seeing and doing sort of myself or with an organization. So I'm trying to talk about it out loud with other people who have their own ideas about similar sorts of things and how to solve these problems and try to find a way that we can remix and connect and amplify one another's efforts. And slowly materialize a high functioning social network and software platform that satisfies a whole bunch of us and might actually then attract a bunch of other people to do something interesting. And this is all, I think, way more complicated than Wikipedia because Wikipedia is meant to be an encyclopedia and they discovered Wikis. They built the Wikimedia engine, which is the only piece of software they kind of need. There have been other side projects and so forth. But Wikipedia is this, you know, consistently among the 10 most trafficked websites and is like frameable. And this is not frameable in that way. This is a lot goofier and squishier and needs protocols and APIs and ontologies and communities and all that kind of thing. So thanks for asking that. I think I wanted a little field from your question, but let me go back to the queue here. We've got Dave, Klaus, Grace, Mike. Just to briefly comment, Jerry, somewhere within what you just said was an articulation. At least I heard an articulation of what this is, whatever this is. What I also wanted to say was, you know, making a distinction between a democratic process and a much more directive process. Sometimes though we tend to value kind of democratic process, sometimes a little bit more direction and directive is a really good thing. Totally agree. And I don't think we're a democracy in any particular way. We don't vote on anything. We don't like that democracy has a bunch of things that we're missing entirely. We're more like a community that meets in a pub that has a couple of projects to build like a model airplane and a quilt and a couple of other things. We talk about them. And I'm trying to figure out, am I Ted Danson? I'm really more like Cliff Claverin, which is unfortunate. But like, you know, how does that really work? Dave, over to you in the booth. Thanks. I mean, at least Cliff delivers the mail, right? Isn't that the guy? I think he does, although he seems to be in the bar all the time. So I don't know. So for your younger people, I guess I'm kind of riffing off of what you were saying, but also Grace, I was going after the project idea that kind of from, I feel like a lot of the global regeneration collab stuff is a similar kind of feel as to this. It's a whole, you know, kind of the coffee shop thing. You know, we do lots and lots of zoom meetings, but they tend to be smaller than this. Probably more diverse, I would argue, but, you know, it's still within a very specific realm bubble. I think that we're, you know, we're living in. And my observation has been that, you know, there's two kinds of people, there's two kinds of projects. There's, there's a few projects that have come kind of from the community working together and discovering something that they're going to collaborate on. That's really rare and hard. And then it's much more common that people have an idea that they've got their teeth into and they want support for their project, right? It's their idea. And I kind of feel like it's much, it's probably more productive because there's so many more of them to help people with their idea, right? That it is to pretend that somehow magically we're going to create a group idea. It's been my, my, my. I think that was Dave who froze and hopefully not me because I see everybody else still moving. Okay, good. That was, that was super interesting too. So Klaus, Grace, Mike. But it's a great look on Dave actually. Somebody got a screenshot too late. I apologize. I apologize for Vermont Wi-Fi. It's not my fault. I was just saying that we could, we could cross threads on project presentations if you were all interested. And I can imagine having projects coming into the GRC that we're going to have presented by the owners and have OGM people show up at those for conversation and discussion. And I think of it a little bit is adding a stage to the pub so that you've got it, you know, another product line that you're on the pub is offering kind of. Thank you. And we could go into ciders. We could do nitro beverages. We could do like smart water who, you know, like for a global brain, what do you need? You need smart water for God's sake. You set up a green egg. Exactly. You know what they say, Jerry, if you're drinking smart water, it's not working. That is so nice. Plus. Yeah, let me slow in maybe another wrinkle here. We are really living in a very transformative stage. And so we have a dysfunctional political process. 90% of the US media is controlled by six corporations who have a keen interest in maintaining the system as it is. And so the what is emerging in groups like ours, across the spectrum, LinkedIn and other discussion groups is a sharing of information that was up till now not readily available. So what, what, what wants to emerge that seems to want to emerge is that same level of synchronization in the off channel. Let's call us off channel groups that you see in, for example, the Alec and the, the national associations for farmers for all kinds of professions, because the industries are highly organized and structured, you know, and they have people on standby working full time to think ahead where may this go. What's to our advantage, but it's uncoordinated. It's sub optimizing the economy, which is where we are basically. So the challenge now is to, to, to create some sort of synchronization of what is reality, what is real, right? So in my case, what constitutes regenerative agriculture? What is this thing? No, so not that you, you can have some clean washing coming. So the same is true in the energy sector and other places to have to have an understanding of, of best available science, best evidence-based information now, and, and cuts through all these distortions and, and the noise that, that you're surrounded by. And, and, and I think once, once we achieve that, and I think we will get there because you can't put that Cheney back into the bottle as more people share information, communicate with one another. That synchronization will place, but right now we are in the middle of a transition period. And it could go wrong. Right. I mean, it's not to say that it couldn't go wrong because the political process isn't so much too much. Thanks class. You're making me want to be a part of a cabal of systems ninjas or systems hackers or, or sort of a well in white white hat systems hackers or something like that where we're just kind of pushing and tipping and we meet at the pub to compare notes and figure out what's up and so forth. Then we break off into sub projects that are in hopefully substantive in different ways, boost each other's projects and then come back in and share like how it went and what we learned, et cetera. But, and the piece we don't do that well that would help a lot is to have a better shared memory for what we've figured out in all these adventures and how this all works. So it's not only storytelling at the pub, which is actually super, super important anyway. Grace over something that you said Jerry, which was something like help. Like I have this idea I have a clear vision of what I want to do, and I know that I'm missing some of the capacities for that. And I want to jump in and say, well, how about we help you with that? Like how about we start to actually be a kind of group that one of the things people can say is help and conduct a meeting and say, this is my vision. This is what I'm missing. Help. And, you know, it's, oh, can I get louder? I don't know. Can I? I can hear you pretty well, but true. Am I louder now? Yes. Good. I press a variety button. You're actually louder than the rest of us now. Well, what else is new? Keep going though. I love what you said. So like, I think it's so hard to say help, isn't it? Yes. And so I want to step over that and I want to say yes, I have a lot of the organizational background, a lot of the people in my space, the crypto space, and I think a few of the people in the room are very good at doing things on their own and not great. They're very good at getting people to do them together. And that happens to be a skill set I have in training that I have. I'm certainly happy to offer it. And whatever it is, yes, Jerry, why don't you like, or any of us, why don't we create a format, which is like. The you're allowed to say help format. Where we bring people into the room, we present what we need to present. And we say, this is what I'm missing. I like that a ton. Thanks, Grace. And. I think the idea of office hours was some intention toward this without much structure and without much publicity or whatever else, but the idea that. Hey, I'm going to, I'm going to work with my garage door open anybody who'd like to come by and work. The idea is not to have a salon conversation, but rather here's the agenda of what I think I'm going to be working on for these hours, which lead toward the thing I'm trying to construct. And then anybody who feels like it dropped in. And I've had a hard time figuring out what are the sequence of calls and topics that I put on my office hours because I'm not thinking systematically enough in some sense there. So Pete's pointing to the page, which I haven't updated in a week or two, but I would love to because that's that's actually, I think a place where this can start, at least start. Gosh, there are so many euphemisms for help. Aren't there. Thanks Grace, Mike. Just to give a little history on this. Jerry, it may be useful to think back to what you and Esther Dyson did back in the, in the 90s and early, early odds. You built this incredible community. You brought people together and showcased important new events and mega trends. But I thought the most important and enduring product was released 2.0. 1.0. Right. But the point there is that if you look at collaborative processes that spin off great new initiatives, you know, not open source projects that bring people together to do something together, but instead these, these hubs, strange attractors that bring talent and people with problems together and then spin off little teams that go and work with them. The two things that happen is that there's an event and today they can be virtual in the past, they were in real life and there's some kind of written product that gets put out on a regular or semi-regular basis. And that written product is really important. I mean, it's, in some cases it's just a bunch of people who throw out a manifesto and say, hey, we're going to go work on this project, join us if you can. You know, here's, here's seven slides. In, in the world I'm very familiar with the internet standards. It's actually a draft standard that a bunch of people at the internet, internet task force or the worldwide web portion decided was needed. And they iterate, iterate, iterate and the process is pretty open and transparent. So there's a lot of ways for people to feed into the process. But I, I, I love thinking of release 1.0 and PC forum as a model. And, and the, the big difference of course is that we're looking at an even broader landscape and an even broader group. And we have these tools now to do things in a virtual way, but I, I think the discipline of having a deadline for either some kind of meeting or some kind of written product. It really gets people to move forward and implement. Mike, thank you. How much work that would be. You just opened another great can of worms. I'm going to open a can of worms. I'm going to open up a can of worms. I'm going to open up a can of worms, because next Tuesday I will be in New York city to attend this event, which is at beta works. Beta works is hosting a tools for thinking sequence of events leading to a think camp where startups apply and go through a filter to be in a, in a wide combinator ish kind of setting later this fall. So exactly, it's gonna be like an old home week. You can sign up and the live stream is free. A 10 thing is like a hundred bucks. But that's gonna be actually really fun. Then separately, it's really interesting because the PC Forum, the conference we used to organize was this highly produced event that led me to invent Jerry's Weekend Retreats out of frustration. So I had gone to a bunch of different things that were about like group process based on trust. So Quaker meeting, Bomes dialogue process, open space technology, Harrison Owens thing. I had training in all these things. And that mixture of things sort of was a contrast to this high visibility, high attention, personal computing forum that didn't really sort of work for me. So that's really interesting. And then one of the reasons I left Esther is that I was writing a newsletter that had a circulation at its peak of like 1800 copies that we know a lot of companies would receive unstable, maybe Xerox and then send out to everybody. And that because it was captive was never gonna sort of make the rounds in the way that information today makes the rounds. And I saw that there were all sorts of people writing really intelligent things for free and open in blogs and all this stuff that was emerging at the time. And I'm like, that's the way this auto work it shouldn't be protected like that. And I will add that I can't stand writing under deadline although I wrote under deadline for a dozen years for Esther and before that for new science which really made me happy and like put work in the world that I created that I'm very proud of a bunch of which I've just scanned. So I will find, I have a Google drive where I scanned all of the continuous information environments research that I wrote back in 91, 92. And if you look through it, you can sniff smartphones. It's kind of interesting and kind of fun. So anyway, sorry for all those different things but I think you're right about deadlines, you're right about written output except different from what the protected newsletters you know, overprotected IP might be but this medium wants us to be sharing more of what we know and what we do in that place. Last thing I'll add is I'm looking to recruit more people to be scribes or map makers or context weavers during the sequence of events at BetaWorks. So please contact me if you'd like to be one of the scribes. There's a page I've got up for scribing these events and whatever tool you'd like to use is a welcome tool just to figure out how to start taking and sharing notes together through that sequence. Rick. Yeah, I'd like to return to the purpose of this meeting and I'd like to contextualize my comments based upon what Stuart and Grace said. And I don't know what version you are in terms of open global mindset but I think there's sort of almost implicit a call to action to raise the game in some way. And so I think Stuart's comment is right on the money in terms of somebody has to take it what the next version of this enterprise is. From my perspective I see it more as an ecosystem of a hub but that's just a perception. And is it really a hub? If not then how can it become a hub and what would it look like? So my call to you, Jerry, is thinking about what you would begin to document or put down vision, mission, credo, et cetera, et cetera into a sort of how to revitalize the group but then use what Grace was talking about. So if you were to prepare something or update something that we would all read in advance and use the methodology that you were just talking about with Grace you're then getting the wisdom of the crowd adding into where you're going. And that I think the one of the things I find with new organizations and I'm sort of on the fringe of the other one it's very difficult when you're on the outside to know what is the governance? What is the vision? What is the mission? You don't know all the people and the process of doing that will create relationships that would help to enhance the next version of this enterprise. So that's my two cents. Agreed, Rick, thank you. Mr. Caronza. Unmute, post and chat, Bing. So I am asking for help. Basically I've been working for 38 years on the foundation of a global mind that is evolvable from personal to global and I've been thinking about it for a while been working alone and I'm moving out after cancer to try and take some of that healing and compound it into shared healing. I gave a talk at the2600hope.net and people said best talk in the show. So that's happened several times but I've only talked about it about four times. So it's happened three of those times. Love to present here but presenting Friday at archive.org's Friday meeting. Which anybody could attend. Do you want to ask the link? I just posted the link. Oh, good, thank you. Sorry, I didn't see it. I have a specific ask, the second link. All right, I think the first link is the proposal for a talk at D-WebCamp. I'd love comments and questions in the comments so that they're shared by people. Is there one more thing there certainly is? Our friend Eric reminded me of it. Hi, Eric. So basically we have a small group about developing MX Further on the matter most. It's closed, but we're gonna open it and that's about it. And thanks friends. Thanks, Mark. The Friday meetings at the archive are fun. They're like, you get a real sense for what's happening at the archive. They sort of go around and do some internal business and then they have a guest speaker, they start with some music, totally worth attending and free to attend. They love people coming in, so please do. And Grace reports that the Zoom isn't the right Zoom link. So if you want to double check, don't use this. Yeah, don't use it now. It's very likely in action. Yeah, please. Yeah, so that's an interesting problem. I'll think about that problem and probably simply post in the matter most channel when I can figure out the right solution to that problem. I do live journaling using my memory experiment or mind experimental named after the MX missile to kind of like fuck that meme of a doomsday Reagan device into submission with something that might be better. Let's see, bling, bling, bling. I think that's it. Oh yeah, check out the live notes in the channel. The channel would be... The channel that you posted earlier in the chat, which is in our matter most servers. That's it, Town Square. Yeah, thanks for that, Mark. Thank you, bye. Cool. Oh wait, someone else was in the queue and they just unqueued. Forgotten who was there. And we're getting close to the end of this call. So Mr. Homer. With regard to what Collya just posted, I was thinking about this before the call of, you know, OGM, I love this pub. A lot of my friends are here in this pub and I like the Grog. But I have to say it's mostly a bunch of old white guys. And, you know, if we're really about creating something in the world out of OGM, we have to have way more diversity than we have. Cause right now I'm an old white guy myself and I'm tired of following old white guys. I'm tired of reading old white guys. I wanna know what other people are thinking. My character is formed by being the fact, by the fact that I am an old white guy. And I recognize that people who have different skins and different genders and different ways of thinking and different backgrounds think very differently than me. And if we're gonna be open global mind, those voices need to be here. And until they're here, we're just an old white guy club. And I'm happy to be here. It nourishes me deeply. I love everybody on this call. I've had fantastic conversations, built relationships here. It's terrific, but it's not satisfying on the level of a global movement. It just isn't there. So I just wanted to throw that out there. Another thing I wanted to say was, as a facilitator, I'm always looking when I'm charged with creating some kind of project of not what information do I need to convey to people, but how do I create the conditions for them to think together effectively so they can solve their own problems? So I put that as a question for open global mind. How can we create the conditions for people out there in the world to think more effectively, to solve, Rick's mentioned a couple of times, wicked problems. If you approach a wicked mess with a problem-solving mindset, you're gonna make it worse. And yet I would say probably 90% of the people I encounter only know how to think in problem-solving mode. They don't know how to think wicked problem mode. So how do we shift that? How do we create the conditions for people to start to think differently? Just a couple of things on my mind as we go through this call. And Kalia, it's really nice to see you here. Haven't seen you since the fabulous facilitator days. Welcome. Yay, same here. And thank you for bringing this up. This has been a constant thorn in my side. And I would love to figure out how to solve for this. Gil. Yeah, thanks, Kalia. Hi, Kalia. And thanks, Ken. Those are just a couple of things on your mind. I shudder to think what else is going on in there. And yeah, maybe other people who are different than us don't want to come here. Maybe this is not interesting. Maybe it's interesting to us and not to other folks. And so we keep on saying, let's invite other people, but they're not coming or they come and don't stay. So maybe the problem isn't the inviting. Maybe this is just not of interest to them. Kalia, I'm curious to know what you see as the cultural programming that makes it such. Either if you want to speak now or offline. Maybe the thing for us to do is not invite people into this group, but for all of us to get out of the pub more and go to other communities and hang out there and listen for a while. And maybe participate eventually or maybe not or maybe come back here with some insights, but this is not the only pub in town. I've been trying the frequent other pubs strategy, which works some. And I think it's, well, Grace says in the chat that she'd love Kalia to jump in. Kalia, I don't know if you want to jump in on this issue here. You don't have to, but we would love to hear from you. Oops, sure. Hi, it's nice to see everybody. It's like, I'm like, I love this. Like it's fun. There's like people I know from lots of places and that I've found on Hangau within the past. I think like what I'm saying, like what I meant about, I think it's like really complex these issues, right? So I'm glad that I feel safe to bring them up and I feel this group will listen and try its best to understand what I'm saying. It's, which is, you know, I run, I lead a community that is full of lots of white guys, but it's also a cultural space where it's safe to invite women and people of color and they'll probably have a reasonable time. Nothing is 100% perfect ever, but the, and they usually come back, right? And if I come, like I'm here today and I'm like, oh, I can't invite anybody to this space because they're gonna show up and it's not gonna be a friendly, comfortable space with a low probability of something weird happening in terms of a negative experience, right? So that to me is like, there's, you know, understanding, you know, one example is like Western universalism and it's, you know, it's beauty, but also it's limitations, right? If there isn't a cultural awareness of that and an openness to understanding that as a kind of blind spot that we have in the West, then it's really hard to, you know, that's one small example, but to me, it's like, it's not just quote unquote, diversity training, it's this deeper kind of what are the cultural patterns? What are the conversational patterns? What is the discomfort with people not talking about so I just let a conference this week, in fact, that was the Internet Identity Virtual Half Day Event that was centered on Asian time. The majority of the participants were based in Asia and Asian. Most of the people who talked in most of the sessions were white guys because there was a discomfort in one, there's more time and space open, I believe in Asian conversations, but also just a discomfort with the non-speaking that meant they kept filling with the time that opened up instead of waiting for other people to take up that space. So anyways, those are my thoughts and to me it's, you know, yeah, it's complicated, but I think it's possible. So, yeah, one thing I'm, I think, quite aware of is that some people are daunted just by the conversation here and by jumping in or term taking or being present that they, I've heard and seen that, no problem with that, I get that. Otherwise, I don't, yeah, other than the occasional and I think infrequent statement by somebody that's not sensitive to something, but I don't get how this is a high risk setting for other people to come into. I am not understanding that at all. Other than it's statistically overwhelming because this turns out to be a bunch of older white guys. But can you clarify, can you help me see that? I feel like I'm blind to something that's sitting right in front of me and I'm really not seeing how this is a hostile group. I try really hard to be welcoming, to be even-handed, to make room for people who don't look like they're talking, to pay attention to people who tuned out, all that kind of stuff. And so I'm not getting how this is a high risk setting. I don't wanna, okay. Would I invite a woman I work pretty closely with, Sherene Mitchell, who leads Human First Tech to this space? No, she's African-American and we run Human First Tech together. She occasionally comes and visits the identity space that I work in and that's, it's just like who, we all know diverse, I know lots of diverse people. It's complicated, Jerry. It's a very subtle feeling and it's not like, maybe it's one of the other women can talk about, like why don't you invite more women you know to this space? That's a question to ask. That's like a way to start getting at where the really subtle challenge culturally is. And Pete thinks some interesting stuff in chat. Yeah, can- Jerry, I have an answer for you on that. Please. When I first showed up here, whenever it was a few years ago, I was very daunted. There's a lot of heavy duty intellectuals on this call and I'm no longer daunted because I realize there's also a lot of really great soft-hearted, open-hearted people here. But it was hard to speak up and I've witnessed on calls here several people saying, wow, this is, I'm afraid to speak up and these are smart people. So I think that's part of it is that the intellectual level that goes on here is challenging. And if I was a young person of color, a young woman of color coming in here, I'd be like, do I speak up and tell these guys what I think is going on? I mean, that's a big risk. So from in your, through your glasses, hey, I'm a nice guy, I try to pay attention. I look for people participating or not. But for someone coming in with a very different lens, it's gonna be, it's gonna look quite different. And I don't think that we have done enough to A, invite people and B, to create a safe hospital space for them. So I think it's a real interesting challenge. And I mentioned in the chat, you know, KecoLab, when Lauren and Charles were running KecoLab, I would tune in. There'd be like six people from Africa. There'd be a person from Belgium and three from France and two from Germany and a bunch of the US folks, maybe someone from Asia, not so much because of the time lags. But that was an incredibly diverse call. And there are no, you know, people would say, hey, you know, I live in a developing country. I'm in a place where I don't have your level of education and, you know, socioeconomic status and rapport here. And, you know, but I'm trying to work on permaculture because I need to feed my people. And, you know, those are incredibly important voices to include and we're not getting them here. So, Kalia and I met through Fabious Facilitators, which is Lisa Heft and Lisa, you may know Lisa from your open space days. You know, Lisa used to say to me, if you want Latinos in your group, you need to put the invitation in Spanish and go and post it in places where they're gonna see it. So, you know, it's one thing to say to people, please invite someone else who doesn't look like you or think like you. It's quite another to actually go out there and be really active and say, everybody, you have to go out there and find somebody younger or different color or different education or different background and really make it attractive for them to show up. And then we need to create the space for them to not feel like, holy cow, how do I talk in front of all of these really smart people? Cause that's very intimidating. I agree with that. Thank you. Dave. Yeah. And sorry, because I raised my hand back before this conversation. So I'm a little bit out of sync, but maybe it ties back in. So my framing of what OGM would like to do is support large-scale collaboration. I kind of feel like the next generation of society, you know, we have government, we have businesses, but we don't have whatever is in addition in addition. So that's what I think we're trying to do. And I think that facilitation is one of the technologies that we need for that, right? So I feel like the conversation around facilitation is really on point. And like demonstrating good facilitation and experimenting with it and stuff should be really central. And, you know, it is funny to see everybody coming back together. So I feel like we played with this stuff more 20 years ago, you know, and I feel like we, it's time to come back, you know, it's another generation and we need to be doing it again. And so then the only other thing I was just gonna add, in the GRC, right, when we've had a bunch of issues and we've had kind of a walk out by folks who saw the GRC as too colonialist. And it's like, I don't really know where to go with that except to decide that the GRC is not gonna be able to represent everybody for everybody. It doesn't make sense for me to reach out and say, okay, GRC is gonna be diverse, but GRC could participate in diversity, right? So I wouldn't, I don't know if OGM's gonna ever be different than what OGM is today, but I think OGM could participate in a more diverse network, right? Which I think it's back to the cross-fertilization problem, which then leads me to this, I stuck a link in the chat for the Buckminster Fuller's playing with Willow. And I'm seeing a lot of people talking about Willow. I don't know, Gill, if Willow's a good platform, but I like the idea of having a presence that people could deal with synchronously that multiple organizations could play in. So this notion that we could actually create a, you know, a cyber world and all of our entities could do our office hours in the same place, kind of, right? That seems kind of interesting to me. So like, what if we all set up offices kind of with the next door to BFI and somebody's there all the time? And Jerry, I probably learned about it from you, but didn't like in the old days, Joey Ito is basically always on IRC, right? It's like, where is our IRC where there's always a touch point where there's a person, right, that you can engage with and could we recreate that? We sort of have that on the matter most chat server in some way. It's like, you know, you can post there and chat. There's the town squares, everybody on the server is on the town square channel that kind of exists that way. And it's not just one place like the Joey's IRC channel was a singular channel, right? But it sort of plays that role. Yeah, and I guess that, you know, that is the problem even with Willow is like everybody says, we'll come to my platform and then we'll have that role, you know? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Thanks, Hank, Gil, Rick. Yeah, this has been a really rich discussion and I put a few things in the chat and I'd like to comment on almost everything that was said, but I'd just like to keep to a couple of short comments. One is when I try to describe OGM to people, no matter what I say or how long I talk about it, they all not say, oh yes, so it's a think tank. And somehow it's a think tank and there's not enough diversity in it and that's true. And maybe it's too bad, but we should certainly cherish what we are. We are something special. And if it's just a think tank and it's not a do tank or it's a launching pad or it's something more proactive and is mostly but not exclusively all the white guys, okay, that's what it is. And it's nourishing and we should be proud that it's gone so far. Yeah, about diversity, of course, if you want to get young people in a group, you should put the advertisements and the invitation to places they go in the same for any type of person that's not represented in the group. The question is, do we want that and I'll leave it open. And finally, I'd like to comment about one comment on what should OGM do and it's a reference to something Klaus said, long time ago in this conversation, I did put it in the chat, midwifing what wants to emerge or seems to want to emerge. And of all the different groups that I know of in the world, there's very few that actually take that type of that's that type of stance that they can help midwives or whatever term we want to use it, things that seem to want to emerge to come out. And right after that Grace said, it's so hard to say I need help and that's absolutely true. So it has to be done in a way that it's not humiliating people into saying we need help in cultures where that's just not done. But I think that's something that I definitely buy into aside from the think tank and the thought aspects. Okay, thanks. Thanks, Hank. That's really helpful. Gil, then Rick, then we should probably wrap our call because we're at our time. Yeah, I'll try to be quick. So Hank's thing, we don't always need to, we don't always know to ask for help or what we need help with. So that's why like the writer's workshop, I did just like, here's what I'm working on. What do you think in a trusting environment where you can tell me, hey, you really need help with this because you don't have this piece together where I might not know to ask. So that's a plus. Dave, I don't get willow, but I like the idea of having some common space where we all have office hours together. That's kind of intriguing to me. However, I need to have my door closed sometimes. One of the things I'm working on hard this week is relearning how to have two or three hours of solid time with nothing else happening than what I'm focusing on. So, the open chat world is not gonna serve me at this point, but I think there's something intriguing there. On the diversity conversation, it's really important. And Clea, thank you for bringing it up and apologies for us asking you to be the representative of the majority of humanity in this conversation. That's kind of unfair, but here you are. Yeah, you are still here. And I, was it Grace who said this? Yeah, we don't need all conversations to be diverse. Some, yes, some, no. They don't need to all be some standard of diversity, but we're clear that there's something missing here. And a couple of things. I'm not interested in us putting up ads somewhere to invite people into OGM, but I think that each of us knows people who are not like us. And we talk about inviting people who are not like us, but have we actually done that? I've done it with one person she hasn't showed up yet. She has joined another kind of high level smart older white guys group that I'm in. And in my experience, for a lot of people, going into any group that's new is uncomfortable. And going into any group that's new and different is uncomfortable. And I remember the first time, yeah, I remember my first time being in groups where I was the only one of like me and it was awkward for me. And I had to deal with it and I had to understand that, oh, this is how it often is for other folks. This young woman who I invited into this other old white guy discussion group was quiet through most of the first session, which I don't think is inappropriate for somebody who's new in a group and then spoke out and spoke up and spoke up, you know, intelligently, forcefully, powerfully, you know, contributively. So, I'm comfortable with discomfort at a certain phase in the culture of a group. I also think there are ways that we can acknowledge that, let people know that, you know, you're welcome to participate at any point that you want. Give space for silence. We talked, I think last week about the Quaker meeting process where we have, you know, we're quiet and wait for someone to speak who maybe hasn't spoken before. Jerry, you've done that. You've done something like that sometimes. There's a plus there, sort of things we can do on that. For me, that's not the central focus of what we're trying to do here, but it's certainly an important enrichment to what we're doing here and what we're trying to do in the world. So, more to say, but I'll leave it at that. Thanks, Gil. And just Eric, tell us why the who came up. It's just a class callee is an identity woman and I think of the song, Who Are You? So I make these connections in my mind. Yeah, there you go. Yeah, thank you. So maybe that should be callee's theme song. It's sort of what you're saying. Something like that. Who knows? Good already. Rick. Yeah, just in the spirit of inclusiveness, what Kayla brought up, I thought was really important and I think one of the most difficult thing for men to do is to shut up, say nothing, don't be defensive, don't go and don't say anything about whether we're safe or not. Understand the other person's perspective. And my daughter taught me this many years ago when she told me that I was mansplaining and she gave me the best education in this and it's difficult to do but it's called, therapeutically it's called validation where you don't respond, you just understand the other and that was very interesting that they triggered David's reaction that people, we are not aware of our blind spots in a way that marginalizes people unintentionally from our perspective. From their perspective, that's different but you have to find out more about the other to see if you can make it more inclusive and safe and that takes work. So work in progress. Thanks, Rick. Anyone with any wrapping thoughts for this call? I've really enjoyed this call. I thought this was really fruitful and useful and I appreciate your all being here. Oh, I have one idea very quickly. One is think about having a co-chair as a woman an advisory group that's interdisciplinary and transgenerational so that you, and then you have those people part of different organizations so they can take the message from that back. I used to be on a professional liaison committee and there was my role responsibility to connect up with networks. So you try and find the organization and you try and invite them to be on your advisory panel or board or whatever. So that's another way of trying to break down some of these implicit barriers despite the fact we think we're being inclusive. Thanks, Rick. Thank you for your hand up. I was just about to go to her. Go ahead, Judy. Sorry to jump in late on all of this. I've been listening just in curiosity. I think there's a real issue when that all of us women have faced being few women walking into rooms full of men and it's not something that you do comfortably even if you're the outspoken, pretty confident kind of person that I am. You notice it and you know that you have to sort of be careful how you introduce yourself and there's a whole bunch of crummy dynamics. And it would be really helpful to find some number of larger women's groups and ask them to work with us in some fashion so that we were bringing in a group of people we could address numbers differently. And it concerns me too that we have a very limited number of any other type of diversity as well, except possibly some invisible diversities that we wouldn't know about. And I think that if we want to really be effective in major social change, we need a much broader base of individuals than a group of, excuse me, but highly educated intelligent articulate white men who are already in positions of influence. And we're not really including the perspectives of a lot of other groups except through those of us who reach out to those groups and can come in and say, well, I'm aware of this perspective or that perspective. So this would be a major shift in how we're doing things and needs to be thought through carefully. And I certainly value what we're doing as it is, but I think if we wanna make this actionable, we need a much more diverse base and a lot more affiliations and multiple representations and we need numbers. Love that, Judy. Thank you. Just for grins, because we're talking about in the chat a little bit about Witte. So I have a thought for women's networks, which includes sisters, WISE, the transition network, GraceNet, Open Heroines, women in government back to 1988, WIM. And I know only a little bit about these, but I will put a link to this thought in the chat in case anybody wants to look at them and see what's up. But yeah, Witte was founded, I think, by Anita Borg back in the day, like a really long time ago. And then I didn't know that it had become what you were talking about, Kalia. I also think it's really important that we look at, let's say, Indian networks, Pakistani networks, whatever they would be because the cultural differences are significant between all of these different cultures. The gender one is actually more homogeneous across many different cultures than many other behavioral traits and customs. And so if we really want to be the fully open community that would be my ideal goal, we have to be inviting in and adapting to and accepting different forms of processing and communication. It's the same thing global business has to do. If you're an American company and you go deal with the Japanese or the Chinese or the Koreans, that's different than how you deal with the South Americans. It's different than how you deal with various individual countries in Europe. And in each case, it's us that needs to accommodate their style because otherwise we're not really partnering. Yeah, exactly. Anyone else with any wrapping? I have a poem that I would like to read if that's okay with people. And thank you. And it's dedicated to all the men on the call. This is from Pablo Neruda. Now we'll count to 12 and we will all keep still for once on the face of the earth. Let's not speak in any language. Let's stop for a second and not move our arms so much. It would be an exotic moment without rush, without engines. We would all be together in a sudden strangeness. A fisherman in the cold sea would not harm whales and the man gathering salt would not look at his hurt hands. Those who prepare green wars, wars with gas, wars with fire, victories with no survivors would put on clean clothes and walk about with their brothers in the shade doing nothing. What I want should not be confused with total inactivity. Life is what it's about. If we were not so single-minded about keeping our lives moving and for once could do nothing, perhaps a huge silence might interrupt this sadness of never understanding ourselves and of threatening ourselves with death. Perhaps the earth can teach us as when everything seems dead and later proves alive. Now I will count up to 12 and you keep quiet and I will go. Thank you, Ken.