AFU meeting minutes, Feb. 6 / 05

Present:

Bill, Chris, Frank, Rob, Yehuda, Possum, Jess, John, Asher, Todd, Darren, Christopher, and someone else whose name the minute-taker didnít catch

Agenda:

• updates on current courses
• discussion of the possibility of starting free schools in other cities

(AFU franchising?)

• discussion of consensus decision making process (and/as larger

discussion of the organization of the AFU i.e. explicit vs. implicit structures of the AFU)

• follow-up on old promotional campaign / approval of new promotional

initiatives

• discussion of summer term (i.e. organization of) and potential new courses
• AFU end of term party (ëSubversive Socialí)
• Website/email concerns

1. Course Updates

Yehuda- Lucid Dreaming Workshop

>course basically running itself, consistently 15+ people attending

Ashar- Radical Political Economy

>rocky start, but generally good; initially enormous class size now
settled out to a regular crowd of 15 people

Christian- Waiting for Beckett

>core group of over-enthusiastic participants; course has its own
momentum, but there are questions of sustainability

[digressive discussion regarding AFU enrollment policy/procedure (i.e. closed or open?), with conclusion that enrollment practicesówhich are entirely dependant on the facilitator, the location, and the specific nature of the course itselfóshould be more explicitly stated on the course outline and website; general rule is that dropping in to a course/class unannounced is okay if the course location is advertised/posted, though contact with course facilitator is suggested/preferred]

Darren- Creative Writing / Intro to Electronics

>everything going well- electronics course has 11 people, each of whom has
agreed to facilitate one class

Christopher- Carnival Course

>brought forth a tentative, preliminary proposal for the carnival course
crew (in collaboration with other interested AFU folks) to program the AFUís term-end ëSubversive Socialí event (i.e. party); agreement to bring a more concrete proposal to the next meeting on behalf of the carnival course

Bill- Anarchism 101

>large class attendance; shifting facilitators was working well, though
each have very different styles and ways of approaching the idea of facilitation; comment that it was more work than expected organizing a course with 10 different facilitators

2. Free School Franchises?

• this discussion was started with a number of interesting ideas, including the possibility of hosting or organizing a free school conference of some sort, and the relevance/importance of (collectively?) undertaking the project of documenting/archiving the history of the AFU

• w/r/t the question of franchising, after much discussion people decided that it was enough to provide other interested people/groups/cities with a succinct/transparent/accessible text representing the evolution of our own unique free school model, concluding with the general sentiment that we didnít want to see the AFU turned into a formula/franchise

• people discussed the idea of franchising the name/website address ëanarchistuí, deciding in the end that people/groups/cities could use/appropriate the name if they wanted to, but that we wouldnít push it

• the discussion concluded with brief reports on other free schools that have sprung up recently throughout the country (Brampton? Victoria? Vancouver? Ottawa? Kingston?), raising the idea of creating a common website or series of links connecting the various new free schools

[because he had to leave the meeting early, Darren explained his new promotional initiative, which involves a large poster resembling a diploma; his efforts were approved and encouraged]

3. Consensus Decision Making / Structure(-lessness) of the AFU

(this discussion was very heated and engaging, though scattered, accounting for the scrambled nature of the notes scribbled by the minute-taker)

• the discussion began with a few broad questions and concerns about the structure and practices of the AFU, including: >how can we involve more AFU participants and course attendees in the AFU meetings themselves? (historically low attendance and little concern for meetings) >should we have pre-term workshops for facilitators dealing with consensus decision making, anti-oppression training, and the process of ëfacilitationí itself? >should we have (mandatory/optional?) training on facilitation and consensus decision-making for members of the AFU collective? (who is the AFU collective?)

• the broad questions which opened the discussion of consensus decision making were refined and reduced to a series of key, critical questions that were felt to be central to resolving peopleís general concerns about consensus and the structure(-lessness) of the AFU, including: >what/who is the AFU ëcollectiveí? (i.e. how do we define and qualify the term ëcollectiveí in reference to the AFU?) >who can block consensus? (i.e. do yu have to be member of the ëcollecitveí?) >what criteria will be used to determine membership in the ëcollectiveí? (most people assumed that it had to do with the number of meetings attended, consecutive or otherwise, leading to the questionÖ); is attendance at AFU meetings the only criteria that will be used to determine who is in the collective? >should (facilitation, consensus, and anti-oppression) training be pre-requisite to becoming a part of the collective? >how many (consecutive?) meetings before someone is a) a member of the collective, and b) able to block consensus (leading to the question); are membership in the collective and the ability to block consensus necessarily related? >what is the critical number of people necessary to reach consensus (i.e. what is quorum?) >what specific model of consensus decision making will we adopt/use?

• at this point there was a digressive conversation regarding the relative advantages and disadvantages of formalizing the ëstructureí of the AFU (Todd said that if there werenít explicit structures, then there were implicit structures, and sometimes the best types or organizing are based on clear and transparent structures), concluding with the idea that maybe it was enough just to talk about and acknowledge these issues (many people really liked the ëfluidí, ëorganicí, ëamorphousí, ëstructurelessí nature that has characterized the existence of the AFU)

• there was another digressive conversation about the relative benefits of forming ëworking groupsí within the AFU collective to accomplish specific goals (i.e. promotion, retreats, fieldtrips, archiving the history of the AFU, etc.)

• returning to one of the more central questions concerning consensus and the AFU, everyone gave their ideas regarding the number of meetings necessary to become a member of the collective (and therefore have the ability to block consensus); most people said 2 or 3

• the meeting concluded with a general agreement on the (urgent) need for an open workshop on consensus decision making processes

• although few actual conclusions were reached, the discussion of consensus and the ëstructure(lessness)í of the AFU provided the group with a series of critical questions that were left to be concluded at the next meeting

Conclusion

• all of the other agenda items were left to be discussed at the next meeting (conclusion of consensus discussion, follow-up on promotional campaigns, discussion of summer term and new courses, AFU end of term party / Subversive Social), website/email concerns)

• the next meeting was tentatively set for March 6th, with the location to be announced (either This Ainít the Rosedale Library, or Uprising)