Sally, If you are planning to have the meeting at the London BPS
offices, I think you need to check that it will accommodate everyone
who wants to attend. It probably will, but meetings are often over-
subscribed, so that people usually cannot take a guest. This is
rather against the logo of the Society, Bringing Psychology to
Society,as I have pointed out to organisers once.
I am truly baffled by Paul's comment on protecting the interests
of BPS members at the expense of others. It is probable that a fair
number of people who are not existing members of the Community list
voted for the Section and may wish to influence the outcome of
discussions. If the list does not want this, then they should not
have asked for a vote on a Section - and those interested will
include clinical, educational and etc. psychologists, which should
enrich the discussions. Being a member contributing to the planning
of a Section is somewhat more empowering than listening to others who
are not BPS members planning it for you, and this does raise the
issue as to who IS going to plan the Section, and whether they should
be BPS members. This does not mean, however, that others are
disempowered, as it is intended to set up the co-operative. The BPS
makes provision for those who cannot pay subscriptions to a certain
extent, I believe, through being unemployed etc. and this could be
looked into.and I think there is also a category which covers
interested parties who are not members or not psychologists, and this
might be looked into, to legitimise joint meetings. It becomes very
entangled, but contributors can propose such a category if there
isn't one already.
One of the problems about the BPS offices for meetings, and why I
mention it, is that I think the BPS should consider making overflow
facilities using a large screen in a second room, such as is done in
Gresham College in Holborn which holds public lectures. The second
meeting room usually looks unused on the evening of BPS meetings.
Then joint meetings might be easier to hold, on community issues. An
interesting experiment which need not be fraught in the way
suggested. The London and Home Counties Section might explore this
as they have frequent meetings in the BPS Offices, then on other
evenings some BPS members might have the opportunities to take
guests. I have mentioned this once but not as a formal request, to
organisers, but I am not sure whether it has been progressed.
Erica
On 16 Aug 2010, at 15:18, Sally Zlotowitz wrote:
> Hello again everyone,
>
> As Carl has said, this decision has been a great catalyst for
> debate, thanks to everyone for their contributions and I can also
> see the powerful arguments on each side. As the BPS go-between, I
> am certainly not any less concerned about the issues and feel
> ambivalent in much the same way.
>
> We discussed at the Plymouth conference that the section's go-ahead
> is likely to lead to further debate about Community Psychologist's
> approval of the section and its role... and that will keep us all
> on track.
>
> In the spirit of democracy, albeit with a limited group, I have
> counted:
> 10 people in favour of setting a fee now (initials of people: RP
> (off list), EB, AM, ED, CH, NS, JL, JC, JB, SZ)
> 3 against (PD, DF, MH)
> and taken 5 as approximating abstentions (GA, AM, MG, WF, FC)
>
> Please do check I am representing you correctly. Apologies if I do
> get anything wrong, I am doing this at work!
>
> Thus without wanting to give any one list member's argument
> priority, the vote would suggest we set the fee.
>
> However, I am now waiting for a telephone call from BPS senior
> management. I am trying to find out whether we can wait to make
> this decision until after the inaugural meeting/surveying of
> members - i.e. if we can have our fee approved by the Board of
> Trustees in an 'extraordinary' meeting at a later date. I have
> explained that we want to make decisions in a participatory way and
> that the current BPS structure is not allowing us to do this. Maybe
> at least this will set the precedence of showing that we plan to do
> things differently! I'm not sure if it will come to anything.
>
> Friday October 8th is set for the inaugural meeting of the section
> if it does go ahead. This will be advertised to the section
> supporters and in The Psychologist. However, the section business
> is only expected to take up to 2 hours.
> Can I therefore suggest those interested in creating the non-BPS co-
> operative also attend the meeting and this is what we do as a group
> first? Maybe this will start the ball rolling? We can initiate
> discussions about what this would look like on the discussion
> forum, as previously suggested.
>
> I also thought we could perhaps adopt a collective decision-making
> tool - for use online and at the meetings. My suggestion would be
> something like 'Crowd-wise' created by the New Economics Foundation
> (NEF), it is a tool for allowing everyone's voices to be heard,
> but coming up with the decision that best represents the majority
> opinions, but helpfully moves away from 'black & white' poloarised
> decisions.
>
> I don't think I can attach documents but please see here for the
> report on this tool: http://www.neweconomics.org/projects/crowd-wise
>
> If people are interested I could ask NEF if they'd be willing to
> come along on Friday 8th and teach us how to use the tool.
>
> I'll be in touch with regards my talk with senior management.
>
> Best wishes,
> Sally
>
> ___________________________________
> The Community Psychology List has a new website/blog at:
> http://www.communitypsychology.co.uk/
> There is a threaded discussion forum:
> http://www.communitypsychology.co.uk/cgi-bin/discus/discus.cgi
> There is a twitter feed:
> http://twitter.com/CommPsychUK
> To post on the website blog, forum or twitter feed, contact Grant
> or David at the email addresses below.
> David Fryer ([log in to unmask]) or Grant Jeffrey
> ([log in to unmask])
> To unsubscribe or to change your details on this COMMUNITYPSYCHUK
> list, visit the website:
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK
___________________________________
The Community Psychology List has a new website/blog at:
http://www.communitypsychology.co.uk/
There is a threaded discussion forum:
http://www.communitypsychology.co.uk/cgi-bin/discus/discus.cgi
There is a twitter feed:
http://twitter.com/CommPsychUK
To post on the website blog, forum or twitter feed, contact Grant or David at the email addresses below.
David Fryer ([log in to unmask]) or Grant Jeffrey ([log in to unmask])
To unsubscribe or to change your details on this COMMUNITYPSYCHUK list, visit the website:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK
|