0420 – Business Meeting Summary

April 2020– Business Meeting Summary

For the April 2020 meeting, 30 members signed up to attend. There were 7 proposals and they are all posted on the Grow web site with the discussion and outcome. Here is a summary of the proposals and results. For more details visit the web site at:

http://g-r-o-w.com, member page (password sobertodayhow2484) and the Business Meeting drop down.

The business meeting began on April 1, 2020 and ended on April 16, 2020. There were 7 proposals. One was withdrawn and one was undecided and will be held over for the October 2020 meeting.

Proposal 1: Maintenance of “Backup” Leaders
Do away with the weekly leader list keeper having to call for and maintain a list of “backup” leaders in case of the weekly leader scheduled has not posting a meeting.

Proposal 1 failed by a 2/3 majority vote with no minority opinion.

Proposal 2: Eliminate OIAA TS Position
OIAA rep position should be done away with…. We have discussed this at lengths for several meetings back and forth, to keep or dissolve. Since we have not had any actual representative for the last year, it should be dissolved, We can still maintain a visible presence on the internet without a Rep.

Proposal 2 failed by a 2/3 majority vote with no minority opinion.

Proposal 3: Eliminate Grapevine TS Position
Grapevine Rep should also be done away with. Secretary has posted a service position now weekly for the last two months. It’s clear the meeting membership is not interested in the additional topic.

Proposal 3 failed by a 2/3 majority vote with no minority opinion

Proposal 4: Edit Monthly Listkeeper Message and Greeter Letter #2
Edit Monthly Listkeeper Message and Greeter Letter #2 to address the problem of shares that bounce to the listkeepers because they are addressed to more recipients than GROW. Further edit Greeter Letter #2 for clarity and brevity.

Proposal 4 passed with a 2/3 majority vote and there was no minority opinion offered. The listkeeper message and greeter letter #2 will be updated to reflect the language agreed on.

Below is the reasoning and revised message and letter for Proposal 4.

Edit Monthly Listkeeper Message and Greeter Letter #2 to address the problem of shares that bounce to the listkeepers because they are addressed to more recipients than GROW. Further edit Greeter Letter #2 for clarity and brevity.

Rationale:

  1. “Too many recipients” bounces require listkeepers to take several actions
  2. Shares that bounce are delayed from reaching GROW. Some members do not resend, even after being notified by the listkeeper.

Monthly Listkeeper’s Message (this is not the entire letter, just the first paragraphs that show the suggested addition.)

Important Addresses

Listkeeper’s Address: grow-owner@oso-aa.org

(Use this address to change your subscription, or to unsubscribe, resubscribe or ask questions about GROW-related email problems).

Send shares to the List use this address: grow@oso-aa.org
(Use this address for all your shares or posts of any sort to the regular list. Address your share to ONLY the grow@oso-aa.org address. If another address is included (even if in the ‘Cc or ‘Bcc field) the email will bounce). The list is set up to accept messages that are addressed to Grow only. The individual(s) you send messages in addition to GROW will probably receive the message; however, the Grow list will not.

NOTE: Please do not post subscription change requests to GROW because they are too easily overlooked.

Revised Greeter Letter #2

Welcome to GROW! This is one of two emails you will receive from me with the information you need to start participating in our meeting right away. You might want to save these for future reference.

Sharing with the Group

Address your email to grow@oso-aa.organd your post will be sent to all members.

  • Do not add any other addresses to the email or it will bounce. This includes addresses in the ‘Cc or ‘Bcc address fields.

Address your share to ONLY the grow@oso-aa.org address. If another address is included (even if in the ‘Cc or ‘Bcc field) the email will bounce). The list is set up to accept messages that are addressed to Grow only. The individual(s) you send messages in addition to GROW will probably receive the message; however, the Grow list will not.

  • Add grow@oso-aa.orgto your Address Book to ensure GROW emails don’t go to your SPAM folder.

Replying to a Post

  • Do not use the “Reply to All” option when you respond privately to another member’s post to GROW, as your personal message will also be directed to the GROW list and it will bounce to the Listkeepers.
  • For those using phones and tablets, be aware that the default reply option is often “Reply to All.” Please double-check.

Email Volume
The volume of mail through the GROW list can be overwhelming. If you experience this, you might find it very helpful to choose one or more of the following:

  • Create a separate email address to reduce the confusion of mixing GROW mail with your other email. Email the Listkeepers at grow-owner@oso-aa.orgwith your new address. As an FYI, AOL and Yahoo addresses have been problematic for some members with the GROW list.
  • If you use an existing email for GROW, you might create folders for your GROW email; filters can also be set up to direct GROW mail into the GROW folder.
  • Request the Digest Version (a file containing the day’s posts in a single email) by contacting the Listkeepers at grow-owner@oso-aa.org.

Topics
A new meeting topic is sent to everyone on the list each Sunday and we share throughout the week. On topic and Off topic shares are welcome.

  • Off topic posts should be appropriate for an AA meeting. Please note in your subject line if your share is Off topic (Off Topic: … )
  • On topic posts are your shares on the weekly meeting topic. Please note in your subject line if your share is On topic (On Topic: … )
  • Please do not type in all CAPS; this is considered to be yelling.

Web Site and Password
Visit the GROW web site for more information. The URL for GROW is: http://www.g-r-o-w.com. For the members only section you’ll need the password: sobertodayhow2484

Other
If you have questions not answered by our website information, please write to me and I’ll be sure to answer them or send your questions to someone who can.

I hope Grateful Recovering Online Women is helpful to you in your journey and growth in sobriety.

Again, welcome
[ Greeter Name ]
Grateful Recovering Online Women

Existing Greeter Letter #2

Welcome to GROW! Now that you’re subscribed, this is one of two emails you will receive to help you start participating in our meeting right away. You might want to print these out for future reference.

Email Volume
We have found that sometimes the volume of mail through the GROW list can be overwhelming. If you experience this, you might find it very helpful to choose one of the following:

  • create and use a separate email address to reduce the confusion of mixing GROW mail with your primary email address. Please be sure to remember to let the Listkeepers know of your new address.
  • create folders for your GROW email; filters can also be set up to direct GROW mail into the GROW folder.
  • request the Digest Version (a file containing the day’s posts in a single email). If you would prefer to receive the Digest version, please contact our Listkeeper at grow-owner@oso-aa.organd she will make the change for you.

Topics
A new meeting topic is sent to everyone on the list each Sunday and we share throughout the week. On topic and Off topic shares are welcome. We ask that Off topic posts be appropriate for an AA meeting. Please note in your subject line if your share is Off topic (we usually type Off Topic: … )

Sharing
To share with the group, just address your email to grow@oso-aa.org and your post will be forwarded to all members. To ensure GROW emails do not get placed in your SPAM folder, please add this address to your Address Book.

Reply
Please do not use the “Reply to All’ option when you respond privately to another member’s post to GROW, as your personal message will also be directed to the GROW list and it will bounce to the Listkeepers.

For those using phones and tablets, be aware that the default reply option is often “Reply to All”, and double-check that you are not using “Reply to All”.

Please do not type in all CAPS, as this is considered to be yelling.

The secretary posts information about the Trusted Servants and guidelines for our email participation once a month. The Listkeeper (the person who makes sure the technical side of our email list works smoothly) also posts information monthly.

Web Site and Password
You’ll find lots more information on our GROW web site. The URL for GROW is: http://www.g-r-o-w.com.

Some of the information is for members only, so you’ll need the following:
password: sobertodayhow2484

Other
If you have questions not answered by our website information, please write to me and I’ll be sure to answer them or send your questions to someone who can.

I hope Grateful Recovering Online Women is helpful to you in your journey and growth in sobriety.

Again, welcome
[ Greeter Name ]
Grateful Recovering Online Women

Proposal 5: Eliminate “Alternative” from one TS position
I propose to delete the word alternate from the list keeping job description. There are no “ alternates” in the true sense of this word or this work

The dates of term are enough

This proposal was withdrawn and no vote was taken.

Proposal 6: Trusted Servants
GROW adopts the following policy for addressing non-performance in a Trusted Servant position.

Proposed Language (new #9 under Business Meeting Guidelines).

Proposal 6 passed with a 2/3 majority and no minority opinion was offered. The language for the policy is posted on the web site as #9 under Business Meeting Guidelines.

GROW adopts the following policy for addressing non-performance in a Trusted Servant position.

Proposed Language (new #9 under Business Meeting Guidelines):

When a Trusted Servant (TS-A) feels that another Trusted Servant (TS-B) is not meeting the requirements of her position description, TS-A will take her issues to the small Steering Committee (made up of the Business Chair, Secretary, and Listkeepers) for consideration. She should not engage with or confront TS-B. The small Steering Committee can choose to bring the issue to the full Steering Committee.

The review of TS-B’s performance should be based only on the duties outlined in the position description. If it is found that the complaint is based on different personal working styles, preferences, or infrequent mistakes – and TS-B is otherwise meeting the requirements of her job description, the complaint will be dismissed without informing or involving TS-B. If it is established that one or more of the duties assigned to TS-B is not being met, the small Steering Committee will:

  1. Assure that TS-B is aware of and allowed to respond to the complaints and, if appropriate, to propose remedial actions to correct problems.
  2. If TS-B does not propose remedial actions, the small Steering Committee will establish appropriate remedial actions that TS-B can take to correct the problems;
  3. Establish a timeframe and deadline for remedial actions to be taken and documented;
  4. If the small Steering Committee has not already elevated the issue to the full Steering Committee, they will inform the larger Steering Committee of the findings, remedial actions, and timeframe;
  5. The full Steering Committee will decide whether TS-B can remain in the position or should be removed;
  6. If the Steering Committee decides that TS-B should be removed from the position, they will inform her in writing of their decision. The Secretary will deliver the documented decision to TS-B and call for volunteers to fill the position to the end of the current term.

Rationale: There have been several instances in the past where a Trusted Servant did not fulfill all the duties outlined in her position description. While this may have created problems, Trusted Servants who were aware of the problem did not have a formal process for bringing the problem to the attention of the Steering Committee, and their complaint was never raised. Therefore, no action was taken to correct the problem. In one instance, the issue was raised with some Trusted Servants, but there was no process for allowing the Trusted Servant to improve her performance or for making a decision on whether the Trusted Servant should be removed. This proposal provides a formal process that will make it easier to raise such problems to the Steering Committee, to allow the Trusted Servant to correct performance, and to remove the Trusted Servant if performance does not improve.

Proposal 7: Add wording to job description for the greeter trusted servant position.
Add “several times a day” to the greeter job description bullet about checking email.

We will have 3 days to discuss this proposal.

the third bullet currently says

  • Reads GROW mail daily.

the proposed language would say

  • Reads GROW mail several times a day, checking in on a regular basis.

We ran out of time before deciding on this proposal. It has been tabled and will be discussed at the October 2020 Business Meetings.

0420 – Third 3-Day Period Summary

Proposal 7.3

Add “several times a day” to the greeter job description bullet about checking email.
We will have 3 days to discuss this proposal.

the third bullet currently says

  • Reads GROW mail daily.

the proposed language would say

  • Reads GROW mail several times a day, checking in on a regular basis.

Justification – this more accurately reflects the job.

Discussion included concern that members of grow would be reluctant to volunteer for this job based on the time commitment required. Others felt that the proposal reflects the time required and anyone who does step into the job should know what will be needed.

It appeared we were nowhere near consensus and members have strong feeling about the language on both sides. It was decided we would not have adequate time for discussion before the 17th, which is the date that proposals need to be resolved.

This proposal was tabled to be discussed again in the October business meeting.

0420 – Second 3-Day Period Summary

April 2020 Business Meeting – Second 3-day period

Proposal 4.2:
Edit Monthly Listkeeper Message and Greeter Letter #2 to address the problem of shares that bounce to the listkeepers because they are addressed to more recipients than GROW. Further edit Greeter Letter #2 for clarity and brevity.

Rationale:

  1. “Too many recipients” bounces require listkeepers to take several actions
  2. Shares that bounce are delayed from reaching GROW. Some members do not resend, even after being notified by the listkeeper.

Monthly Listkeeper’s Message (this is not the entire letter, just the first paragraphs that show the suggested addition.)

Important Addresses
Listkeeper’s Address: grow-owner@oso-aa.org
(Use this address to change your subscription, or to unsubscribe, resubscribe or ask questions about GROW-related email problems).

Send shares to the List use this address: grow@oso-aa.org
(Use this address for all your shares or posts of any sort to the regular list. Address your share to ONLY the grow@oso-aa.org address. If another address is included (even if in the ‘Cc or ‘Bcc field) the email will bounce). The list is set up to accept messages that are addressed to Grow only. The individual(s) you send messages in addition to GROW will probably receive the message; however, the Grow list will not.

NOTE: Please do not post subscription change requests to GROW because they are too easily overlooked.
Revised Greeter Letter #2

Welcome to GROW! This is one of two emails you will receive from me with the information you need to start participating in our meeting right away. You might want to save these for future reference.

Sharing with the Group

  • Address your email to grow@oso-aa.org and your post will be sent to all members.
  • Do not add any other addresses to the email or it will bounce. This includes addresses in the ‘Cc or ‘Bcc address fields.  Address your share to ONLY the grow@oso-aa.org address. If another address is included (even if in the ‘Cc or ‘Bcc field) the email will bounce). The list is set up to accept messages that are addressed to Grow only. The individual(s) you send messages in addition to GROW will probably receive the message; however, the Grow list will not.
  • Add grow@oso-aa.org to your Address Book to ensure GROW emails don’t go to your SPAM folder.

Replying to a Post

  • Do not use the “Reply to All” option when you respond privately to another member’s post to GROW, as your personal message will also be directed to the GROW list and it will bounce to the Listkeepers.
  • For those using phones and tablets, be aware that the default reply option is often “Reply to All.” Please double-check.

Email Volume
The volume of mail through the GROW list can be overwhelming. If you experience this, you might find it very helpful to choose one or more of the following:

  • Create a separate email address to reduce the confusion of mixing GROW mail with your other email. Email the Listkeepers at grow-owner@oso-aa.org with your new address. As an FYI, AOL and Yahoo addresses have been problematic for some members with the GROW list.
  • If you use an existing email for GROW, you might create folders for your GROW email; filters can also be set up to direct GROW mail into the GROW folder.
  • Request the Digest Version (a file containing the day’s posts in a single email) by contacting the Listkeepers at grow-owner@oso-aa.org.

Topics
A new meeting topic is sent to everyone on the list each Sunday and we share throughout the week. On topic and Off topic shares are welcome.

  • Off topic posts should be appropriate for an AA meeting. Please note in your subject line if your share is Off topic (Off Topic: … )
  • On topic posts are your shares on the weekly meeting topic. Please note in your subject line if your share is On topic (On Topic: … )
  • Please do not type in all CAPS; this is considered to be yelling.

Web Site and Password
Visit the GROW web site for more information. The URL for GROW is: http://www.g-r-o-w.com. For the members only section you’ll need the password: sobertodayhow2484

Other
If you have questions not answered by our website information, please write to me and I’ll be sure to answer them or send your questions to someone who can.

I hope Grateful Recovering Online Women is helpful to you in your journey and growth in sobriety.
Again, welcome
[ Greeter Name ]
Grateful Recovering Online Women

Existing Greeter Letter #2
Welcome to GROW! Now that you’re subscribed, this is one of two emails you will receive to help you start participating in our meeting right away. You might want to print these out for future reference.

Email Volume
We have found that sometimes the volume of mail through the GROW list can be overwhelming. If you experience this, you might find it very helpful to choose one of the following:

  • create and use a separate email address to reduce the confusion of mixing GROW mail with your primary email address. Please be sure to remember to let the Listkeepers know of your new address.
  • create folders for your GROW email; filters can also be set up to direct GROW mail into the GROW folder.
  • request the Digest Version (a file containing the day’s posts in a single email). If you would prefer to receive the Digest version, please contact our Listkeeper at grow-owner@oso-aa.org and she will make the change for you.

Topics
A new meeting topic is sent to everyone on the list each Sunday and we share throughout the week. On topic and Off topic shares are welcome. We ask that Off topic posts be appropriate for an AA meeting. Please note in your subject line if your share is Off topic (we usually type Off Topic: … )

Sharing
To share with the group, just address your email to grow@oso-aa.org and your post will be forwarded to all members. To ensure GROW emails do not get placed in your SPAM folder, please add this address to your Address Book.

Reply
Please do not use the “Reply to All’ option when you respond privately to another member’s post to GROW, as your personal message will also be directed to the GROW list and it will bounce to the Listkeepers.
For those using phones and tablets, be aware that the default reply option is often “Reply to All”, and double-check that you are not using “Reply to All”.

Please do not type in all CAPS, as this is considered to be yelling.

The secretary posts information about the Trusted Servants and guidelines for our email participation once a month. The Listkeeper (the person who makes sure the technical side of our email list works smoothly) also posts information monthly.

Web Site and Password
You’ll find lots more information on our GROW web site. The URL for GROW is: http://www.g-r-o-w.com.
Some of the information is for members only, so you’ll need the following:
password: sobertodayhow2484

Other
If you have questions not answered by our website information, please write to me and I’ll be sure to answer them or send your questions to someone who can.
I hope Grateful Recovering Online Women is helpful to you in your journey and growth in sobriety.

Again, welcome
[ Greeter Name ]
Grateful Recovering Online Women

Discussion was in support of this proposal. One member suggested clarification about what “bounce” means. Her verbiage was added to the suggested letters and messages.
The proposal was unanimously approved.

Proposal 5.2
I propose to delete the word alternate from the list keeping job description.
There are no “ alternates” in the true sense of this word or this work

The dates of term are enough

RATIONAL It simply a housekeeping thing from the secretary viewpoint. When the terms change each 6 months the secretary won’t have to move one person into another position.

There were several objections to this proposal, primarily because it looked incomplete in terms of all the effects that would result. It was suggested that it needed more thought to include all those effects.

Proposal withdraw at the request of the grow member who submitted it. There was no further discussion and there was no vote taken.

Proposal 6.2
Proposal: GROW adopts the following policy for addressing non-performance in a Trusted Servant position.
Proposed Language (new #9 under Business Meeting Guidelines):

When a Trusted Servant (TS-A) feels that another Trusted Servant (TS-B) is not meeting the requirements of her position description, TS-A will take her issues to the small Steering Committee (made up of the Business Chair, Secretary, and Listkeepers) for consideration. She should not engage with or confront TS-B. The small Steering Committee can choose to bring the issue to the full Steering Committee.

The review of TS-B’s performance should be based only on the duties outlined in the position description. If it is found that the complaint is based on different personal working styles, preferences, or infrequent mistakes – and TS-B is otherwise meeting the requirements of her job description, the complaint will be dismissed without informing or involving TS-B. If it is established that one or more of the duties assigned to TS-B is not being met, the small Steering Committee will:

  1. Assure that TS-B is aware of and allowed to respond to the complaints and, if appropriate, to propose remedial actions to correct problems.
  2. If TS-B does not propose remedial actions, the small Steering Committee will establish appropriate remedial actions that TS-B can take to correct the problems;
  3. Establish a timeframe and deadline for remedial actions to be taken and documented;
  4. If the small Steering Committee has not already elevated the issue to the full Steering Committee, they will inform the larger Steering Committee of the findings, remedial actions, and timeframe;
  5. The full Steering Committee will decide whether TS-B can remain in the position or should be removed;
  6. If the Steering Committee decides that TS-B should be removed from the position, they will inform her in writing of their decision. The Secretary will deliver the documented decision to TS-B and call for volunteers to fill the position to the end of the current term.

Rationale: There have been several instances in the past where a Trusted Servant did not fulfill all the duties outlined in her position description. While this may have created problems, Trusted Servants who were aware of the problem did not have a formal process for bringing the problem to the attention of the Steering Committee, and their complaint was never raised. Therefore, no action was taken to correct the problem. In one instance, the issue was raised with some Trusted Servants, but there was no process for allowing the Trusted Servant to improve her performance or for making a decision on whether the Trusted Servant should be removed. This proposal provides a formal process that will make it easier to raise such problems to the Steering Committee, to allow the Trusted Servant to correct performance, and to remove the Trusted Servant if performance does not improve.

Proposal: GROW adopts the following policy for addressing non-performance in a Trusted Servant position.
Proposed Language (new #9 under Business Meeting Guidelines):
When a Trusted Servant (TS-A) feels that another Trusted Servant (TS-B) is not meeting the requirements of her position description, TS-A will take her issues to the small Steering Committee (made up of the Business Chair, Secretary, and Listkeepers) for consideration. She should not engage with or confront TS-B. The small Steering Committee can choose to bring the issue to the full Steering Committee.

The review of TS-B’s performance should be based only on the duties outlined in the position description. If it is found that the complaint is based on different personal working styles, preferences, or infrequent mistakes – and TS-B is otherwise meeting the requirements of her job description, the complaint will be dismissed without informing or involving TS-B. If it is established that one or more of the duties assigned to TS-B is not being met, the small Steering Committee will:

  1. Assure that TS-B is aware of and allowed to respond to the complaints and, if appropriate, to propose remedial actions to correct problems.
  2. If TS-B does not propose remedial actions, the small Steering Committee will establish appropriate remedial actions that TS-B can take to correct the problems;
  3. Establish a timeframe and deadline for remedial actions to be taken and documented;
  4. If the small Steering Committee has not already elevated the issue to the full Steering Committee, they will inform the larger Steering Committee of the findings, remedial actions, and timeframe;
  5. The full Steering Committee will decide whether TS-B can remain in the position or should be removed;
  6. If the Steering Committee decides that TS-B should be removed from the position, they will inform her in writing of their decision. The Secretary will deliver the documented decision to TS-B and call for volunteers to fill the position to the end of the current term.

Rationale: There have been several instances in the past where a Trusted Servant did not fulfill all the duties outlined in her position description. While this may have created problems, Trusted Servants who were aware of the problem did not have a formal process for bringing the problem to the attention of the Steering Committee, and their complaint was never raised. Therefore, no action was taken to correct the problem. In one instance, the issue was raised with some Trusted Servants, but there was no process for allowing the Trusted Servant to improve her performance or for making a decision on whether the Trusted Servant should be removed. This proposal provides a formal process that will make it easier to raise such problems to the Steering Committee, to allow the Trusted Servant to correct performance, and to remove the Trusted Servant if performance does not improve.

The discussion questions included concern about the mistakes trusted servants make, and that anyone not doing their job should be informed. These concerns were addressed – the proposal does not address mistakes, but a trusted servant not fulfilling duties and that the trusted servant in question would be informed. The proposal is for a process to bring the transgression to the steering committee for resolution.

The proposal passed with a 2/3 majority voting yes and no minority opinion.

0420 – First 3-Day Period Summary

2020 Business Meeting – First 3-day period

Proposal 1: Do away with the weekly leader list keeper having to call for and maintain a list of “ backup” leaders in case of the weekly leader scheduled has not posting a meeting.

In the event the meeting isn’t posted AND members start asking if the topic has been posted. The weekly leader listkeeper has the authority to go to grows website and post a meeting from the list of past topics.

RATIONAL. This simplifies the process eliminating any lag time or stress resulting from waiting for one of the backups to respond.

The discussion on this proposal was primarily that what is currently working should not be changed.
There was the needed 2/3 majority voting no on this proposal with no minority opinion to defeat the proposal.

Proposal 2: OIAA rep position should be done away with…. We have discussed this at lengths for several meetings back and forth, to keep or dissolve. Since we have not had any actual representative for the last year, it should be dissolved. We can still maintain a visible presence on the internet without a Rep.

Much of the discussion revolved around how quickly online meetings are evolving and that OIAA is needed now more than ever.
There was agreement that the position has been debated often. Some input was offered that indicated OIAA has improved and some past issues resolved.
One member stepped up to take the position.

There was the needed 2/3 majority voting no on this proposal with no minority opinion to defeat the proposal.

Proposal 3: Grapevine Rep should also be done away with. I have posted a service position now weekly for the last two months. It’s clear the meeting membership is not interested in the additional topic.

There was strong support to keep the position and continue to seek someone to step in as the trusted servant.

There was the needed 2/3 majority voting no on this proposal with no minority opinion to defeat the proposal.

0420 – Proposal 7: Greeter Job Description

Proposal 7: Add ‘several times a day’ to the greeter job description

Add “several times a day” to the  greeter job description bullet about checking email.

We will have 3 days to discuss this proposal.

the third bullet currently says

Reads GROW mail daily.
the proposed language would say

Reads GROW mail several times a day, checking in on a regular basis.
Rationale

This more accurately reflects the job.

Summary of Comments on Proposal 7

I am resistant to changing this wording.  My thoughts are making such a distinction would discourage women who work or lead very busy lives from attempting this service position.  It is my opinion that each TS does the job to the best of their ability and within the boundaries of it being service work.  These positions are not meant to become jobs.  We are all adults and I personally don’t see the need to spell things out in small print.   In my humble opinion

*********
Some online TS positions require much more extensive time than others. Many volunteer for positions, not realizing/understanding the time requirements needed can be time consuming.

Our members come from various backgrounds and ages. I am an older widow, living alone and have lots of time available so I volunteer for positions where my time can be utilized.

We have young working mothers who wish to serve as a TS but have limited time available and there are positions available for them.

But if there are not proper guidelines given in the TS Descriptions, it becomes confusing to those volunteering.

********
I’d back up what Nancy says here. It’s more realistic to let new greeters know that the position requirements ask that you check in ‘several times a day’ rather than a ‘daily’. That way, members wanting to serve know what they’re committing to. Some other ts positions don’t require the same time commitment.  They might, or might not, require a more intense period of commitment over a few days at a time, for example, but not an ongoing daily one.

This added phrase makes sense in light of what the greeting commitment entails.

*****

I agree that adding this clarifies what the Greeter position entails. The greeter is working on a daily basis with a team of three others; in my experience as part of this team(both as a greeter and as a listkeeper) things work smoothly when all four are communicating on a regular basis. It also helps ensure that new ladies hear from us promptly, particularly since there will be different time zones among the greeters/listkeepers. I’ve never found it overly burdensome and I work full time and have a family. Others on the team are always willing to step in if someone needs to be away from Internet for a while, or even days. “Daily” isn’t an accurate reflection of what’s required for this position.

Thanks,

******

I agree Nancy. We should have all the information listed so informed decisions can be made.

*********

Thank you for the ESH shared.

I feel they’ve given me an insight into how the proposal will help GROW grow and be effective in greeting our new members and ensuring they’re responded to efficiently by all those involved.

I’m glad to be guided in this way.

In love and fellowship

*********

When I first saw the proposed new wording for Proposal 7.3, I thought it was kind of…. obnoxious. Like “duh, doesn’t everyone check their email several times a day?” Followed by, hmmm… maybe others don’t!?!

However, after reading others sharing about the level of commitment and time required, this new wording not only makes sense ~ it’s necessary!

As a newer member, and one who’s actively looking for a service position ~ I (we) definitely need a heads up.

Faith n Hope

**********

I agree with changing to the new wording for Proposal 7.3. It explains the position a little better and reminds the TS of what their duties entail.

********

While I understand that checking e-mail more than once a day will help Greeters process requests more quickly, I question whether “more quickly” is really necessary.
What do we expect of our Trusted Servants? Is it reasonable?

Making “several times a day” a requirement automatically limits the number of people that will qualify … or be willing … to do the job. We are an online e-mail AA meeting, not first responders. Yes, I check my mail more than once a day, but I am retired and have that luxury. Is it fair or reasonable to ask this of working mothers? Will the proposal make Grow a more effective messenger?

My personal feeling is that this proposal asks too much of Grow members who want to serve our group as Greeters.

Thank you,

**********

I’d like to address Danna’s statement that carrying out greeter duties ‘more quickly’ shouldn’t be a necessary requirement. I’d argue that it is, and this is based on many years serving on and off as both greeter and listkeeper.

As said before, both the listkeepers and greeters work very much as a team. This doesn’t happen to the same degree with the other TS positions, except perhaps these days with the temporary mentor liaising with the sponsor listkeeper. But even then the element of teamwork is not happening on a daily basis.

Neither is either position dependent in the same way or to the same extent on the cooperation of the other. On the other hand, this is a necessary element in the running smoothly of getting new women subscribed when the listkeepers/greeters work together.

A woman can’t be subscribed unless the listkeeper sends to the greeter who then sends out information to that new woman. When the latter sends back her intro, the greeter then sends it on for subbing to the listkeeper, after which she can then welcome the new woman into Grow. Each depends on the other totally working together as a team.

If this happens in a timely manner (just as, for example, the temporary mentor would want to reach out quickly to a new and distressed member, and not hang about for more than the few days stipulated in that job description), then the new member can be welcomed into GROW. Many of our new members speak of their desperation and need for help. Many of us who’ve held these positions feel that ‘when anyone anywhere reaches out for help’ we want ‘the hand of AA to be there’ and for that we are responsible.

And, yes, it will limit the number of people who can take on the position (but not to the degree that some of you seem to think). But isn’t that how service positions work in face to face meetings all across the globe? I’ve often heard it said ‘horses for courses’. Many members dont take up commitments of one type because the demands of it do not fit with their own lifestyle. Instead, they volunteer for another type. I myself have been in this position many times throughout sobriety. I’ve learnt to say no when something is not for me.

So, it is not about excluding women from the position of greeter. It’s about laying out that an element of it is checking mail a few times a day. A few of our greeters over the last years work fulltime and have younger children. When I first greeted, years back, I was a fulltime working mum, with a teenage boy who was starting to go off the rails. I still managed to check in a few times daily.

I think as you go on in this service role you realise how vital it is to work as a team and that involves being cognizant of time differences, the others’ work commitments to a degree where you know their patterns and would expect them to either be there or not at certain times.We’re a friendly bunch, who fill in at the drop of a hat for the other if they have something else they want to do, are on holiday etc.

Look, it depends on what GROW wants: a swift enough response to the suffering alcoholic (as it stands now), or a response that could take days from start to finish to complete. I certainly wouldn’t want it to take days. Sometimes, it can take a day or even two, but for the most part we try to get a woman subscribed within a 12-hour period from initial enquiry to being welcomed by the group. This isn’t always possible, given we have lives and do other things and may clash timewise with a listkeeper’s routine that day, but it’s an aim (not sure it’s part of the job description but I know it’s what our  dearly loved Jean taught me years back).

There’s a danger if a greeter only checks in once a day that mails can be missed, and that the process could go on for longer than a couple of days. I’d hate for that to happen. Part of the role is building a rapport with your team mates which in turn allows you to work together better. And that entails keeping an eye on your mail.

In service,

********

Dear Ladies,

In Tradition 9  ( the long form page 191 in the 12 x12)  It starts with  Each group needs the least possible organization.  and ends with All such representatives are to be guided in the spirit of service.  for true leaders in AA are but trusted and experienced servants of the whole.  They derive no real authority from their titles, they do not govern.  Universal respect is the key to their usefulness.

I know for myself that service was the way to sobriety.  When I came into the rooms I was beat down and found many excuses to beat myself up.  By changing to words from “Reads Grow Mail Daily”  to “ Several times a day”  is almost an automatic fail for me.  If life gets busy, and I cannot complete my commitment as mandated.  It breeds fear.  Fear of not living up to the goal,  fear of being turned in for not being on task.  Fear of being called infront of the steering committee for not doing the job. ( which we just passed I might remind you )

I wish we could find a win win,  maybe reword things a bit to ..  Read Grow mail at least once a day…?   I could live with that,  If I can’t check in many times,  I am still doing my job,  If I can check in more, then I am going above and beyond and building my self esteem.   Sobriety is a tricky thing,  service work can be as well.  I hope service work builds character,  helps a new comer to grow themselves up,  builds sobriety.  I would be very disappointed if we placed such restrictions on members.

Yours as a member trudging along.

********

I think you have to give people a realistic view of what this important position entails. I don’t believe it expects too much from a person to check email several times a day (many do with their personal email accounts and social media these days, myself included). The position is about being of service to others and putting the program on the front burner. Women who are waiting for an answer to their email may be desperate and every minute seems like an hour or a day. Just my two cents,

*******

Hi ladies

I can hear a clear division in the discussions here on 7.3

We know our Traditions allow for all view points to be shared as we work towards a Group Conscience and I appreciate the views I’m hearing but struggle to know what’s actually going to best.

Our Biz Chair has also pointed out we are due to run out of time to resolve this by April 17th.

I’m just wondering if this might be better to be tabled as a Proposal for the next Biz Meeting?

It is entirely possible that there could be a shared common ground, a compromise in the language proposed that whilst highlighting that this role may involve responding to emails more than once a day, but is also working well with the language that exists?

My feeling is that this sounds, from my experience of discussions similar to these where we seem to have two camps poles apart, that we are some way from us reaching a shared view?

Perhaps the timing where our Biz Meeting Guidelines are that we close business by 17th is Tradition Two at work right now?

I propose we follow the guidelines and finish as per the guidelines on Day 17.

In love and fellowship

********

I think Sophie makes an excellent point.  There does not seem to be a middle ground on this proposal and based on how strongly members feel, it deserves a process that is not rushed.

Proposal 7.3 will be tabled because we cannot finish the process by the 17th.  It will be revisited in the October meeting.

*********

I’ve been seeing the emails go back and forth on this and since I am a new greeter with only the JD of the position to guide me, I volunteered for the service position knowing I’d be able to check my email at least once a day.  However, it does take more than that, as I see now and although I think I’m getting in a groove and adjusting, as a mom who still works full-time, it can be tricky wanting to be of service but not having a lot of time to give.  If it is a MUST that emails must be checked multiple times, please put it in the JD.  However, I think it’s possible without the MUST and an understanding of women waiting by their phone or PC waiting for a response from us and how much of a life line that can be.  I don’t forget it but it’s still requiring some juggling.  I appreciate everyones patience as I go through my training and I thank you for letting me be of service.

*********

Thanks for your input, everyone. Especially you, Lisa!  It’s valuable coming from someone just starting in the TS position.

I just want to point out that the word Nancy and I used is ‘several’ times a time. Not ‘multiple’ or ‘many’. That’s all. No big deal. But it makes a heck of a difference just going to several.

*******

Since it seems that tabling the idea is where this is going,  I would like to propose some ideas to think about.

The problem seems to be the time lag between when a list keeper gets a request at the Grow Owner account  and sending the request on to the greeter.  The greeter then sends info to the person requesting information to the group and then back to the listkeeper to be subbed.

SO  My question then becomes  Why does Grow do this in this fashion?

Can we Add the Greeters to the Grow Owner Mail account, and let them handle the “Greeting” directly, and once membership is qualified, then they can ask the Listkeeper to subscribe  the new member into the group?

Or another solution I have been a part of is the Greeters and Listkeepers  were a team, where all members of the team had ownership privileges of being able to subscribe and unsubscribe members.
The team consisted of between 4 and 6 women, who rotated weeks.  For example,  if there were 4 women  the person ON DUTY would work one week out of four,  and in that time frame all the members of the team would be CC’d all communications so everyone was caught up with conversations.

There are many different ways to skin the cat,  These are just two examples that I can think of,  I am sure there can be other ways of making life here simple.

Thanks for letting me share.

******

Thanks Laurie – this is a really good suggestion.  I was greeter for a year and this was never an issue.  Maybe the volume of the women looking to sub is Overwhelming for some? I’m not sure but the lag has never been more than 12 hrs and considering we are on different time zones all over the world and have different schedules, sleep work etc – that seems pretty reasonable.  Anyway yes I think this is something best tabled till next meeting.  A greeter position is a starting position in any meeting – face to face and in here – I think a bit of patience is needed.  Everyone is getting responded to and it’s really splitting hairs on this “timeliness” matter- especially when it’s very non specific.

Proposal 7 was tabled because the process could not be finished before the business meeting closed.  It will be revisited during the October meeting.

0420 – Proposal 6: TS Performance

Proposal 6: Trusted Servants

GROW adopts the following policy for addressing non-performance in a Trusted Servant position.

Proposed Language (new #9 under Business Meeting Guidelines):
When a Trusted Servant (TS-A) feels that another Trusted Servant (TS-B) is not meeting the requirements of her position description, TS-A will take her issues to the small Steering Committee (made up of the Business Chair, Secretary, and Listkeepers) for consideration. She should not engage with or confront TS-B. The small Steering Committee can choose to bring the issue to the full Steering Committee.

The review of TS-B’s performance should be based only on the duties outlined in the position description. If it is found that the complaint is based on different personal working styles, preferences, or infrequent mistakes – and TS-B is otherwise meeting the requirements of her job description, the complaint will be dismissed without informing or involving TS-B. If it is established that one or more of the duties assigned to TS-B is not being met, the small Steering Committee will:

  1. Assure that TS-B is aware of and allowed to respond to the complaints and, if appropriate, to propose remedial actions to correct problems.
  2. If TS-B does not propose remedial actions, the small Steering Committee will establish appropriate remedial actions that TS-B can take to correct the problems;
  3. Establish a timeframe and deadline for remedial actions to be taken and documented;
  4. If the small Steering Committee has not already elevated the issue to the full Steering Committee, they will inform the larger Steering Committee of the findings, remedial actions, and timeframe;
  5. The full Steering Committee will decide whether TS-B can remain in the position or should be removed;
  6. If the Steering Committee decides that TS-B should be removed from the position, they will inform her in writing of their decision. The Secretary will deliver the documented decision to TS-B and call for volunteers to fill the position to the end of the current term.

Rationale

There have been several instances in the past where a Trusted Servant did not fulfill all the duties outlined in her position description.

While this may have created problems, Trusted Servants who were aware of the problem did not have a formal process for bringing the problem to the attention of the Steering Committee, and their complaint was never raised. Therefore, no action was taken to correct the problem. In one instance, the issue was raised with some Trusted Servants, but there was no process for allowing the Trusted Servant to improve her performance or for making a decision on whether the Trusted Servant should be removed. This proposal provides a formal process that will make it easier to raise such problems to the Steering Committee, to allow the Trusted Servant to correct performance, and to remove the Trusted Servant if performance does not improve.


Summary of Comments on Proposal 6

I think TS-B should be informed of any complaints, whether valid or dismissed as invalid. I know I would want to know. Otherwise, the proposal looks good.

********
As secretary I have witnessed  a few events where TS-A went directly to TS-B.  And there were hurt feeling and personality issues that came up instead of principals.   The intent is to follow the tradition of principles before personalities.  If the complaint is valid the steering committee will certainly gently handle the situation.

If the complaint isn’t valid – which I have seen – it was very disruptive to the group and to myself  and it wasn’t necessary or kind.

I would hope this group would  trust the officers that have volunteered to do their jobs to the best of their abilities.   By TS-A going directly

To TS-B she is short circuiting the role of secretary and as a result I have been left to put out fires .

Thank you for letting me share

********
I agree, this procedure is needed.

I have filled a few TS jobs in the years I have been part of Grow and I have made mistakes in EVERY position.  It has always been pointed out in a discreet way and I’ve appreciated the help.

I don’t think we need a procedure for the learning curve we all go through in taking these positions and I never want anyone discouraged from taking a position.

Thanks

********
I’d be interested to hear more from other members of the Steering Committee regarding this proposal.

Thank you for the experiences shared so far.

********
I have also made a mistake and was pointed out to me in a discreet manner (harsh but kind).

I will not make same mistake again.

My thinking is above approach works well.

********
Having been with Grow quite a while now, I have seen several instances where a Trusted Servant was not doing her job, but because there was no process to address it, nothing was done. Therefore, the job was not executed as per our group conscience decisions for the entire term. I strongly believe that we need a process to allow these issues to be addressed.

The proposal does not address “mistakes.” We all make them, and the proposal does not intend for simple mistakes, especially during a TS’s initial training period, to be sufficient for a performance review. But what if we continue to make the same mistake over and over again? Then it becomes a performance problem, and our group needs a way to raise the issue to the Steering Committee for review and decision-making.

When failure to perform a duty in the job description does happen (which is not often, but it does happen), one Trusted Servant should not be put in a position of pointing out the problem to the person she believes is making it. If she (TS-A) perceives the problem to be serious enough to bring a complaint, more than a handful of TSs should be involved, and TS-A should not contact TS-B directly.

The goal is to handle performance issues in a way that places principles above personalities when performance issues are repeated, not to play “gotcha” because a TS made a simple and honest mistake.

I have been in the posiition where another Trusted Servant was not doing the job as outlined in her job description. I was not comfortable with confronting her personally, and there was no process for me to raise the issue to other TSs. I remained silent, and the problem continued. While I raised it with a couple of Trusted Servants at the time, no one knew what to do about it. This process would give us a way to assure that performance issues are addressed. Because the whole Steering Committee would discuss the issues and then be the decision-maker, it also avoids over-reactions to what might be a simple issue of style or personality.

********
I’d like to hear more as well. In principle having a procedure in place sounds like a good idea. But there seem to be a number of folks who think this is unnecessary.

********
On reading the more recent shares on 6.2 I can hear there is a need to put a process in place.

I have always been of the view that principles before personalities works best and that the Trusted Servants Steering Committee will benefit from a framework to go through in the event there are issues with duties or responsibilities being missed or done incorrectly.

I have made plenty of mistakes in GROW doing service, and I welcome a process to take the personalities out of the way we support TS to rectify errors. A one to one message from another member is just that, and this way it would a Steering Committee conscience.

In my mind there are similarities here with the process we in GROW have if a member is disruptive or inappropriate.

Having a process is important, and so is having a Steering Committee well informed and able to carry out the process.

The proposal in 6.2 seems necessary to me.

In love and fellowship

********
I like that this process goes first to the small steering committee, the same as the process outlined in our Common Welfare Guidelines when there is disruptive behavior in the group. In the occasional situations I’ve been involved in, both as a member of the Steering Committee and the small Steering Committee the hardest thing for me has been the different chains of information. I can think of one situation where there were at least three different email threads going on with different people participating in each. By the time it got to the small Steering Committee it was really difficult to know if we had all the information and there was some confusion as to who said what, when. I think this proposal could help by giving guidance as to when something goes to the small Steering Committee and then the Steering Committee as a whole.

I do think Danna’s differentiating between mistakes and failure to perform a job description duty is important. I’ve made several mistakes as a TS, mostly because I just didn’t know something or didn’t realize I had done something. I’ve had a few pointed out to me. Although I  felt criticized at first (that’s just me being thin-skinned), I chose to take it as a learning opportunity just as it was intended. Important things for me to know so the group could function smoothly. Principles before personalities. None of these mistakes would have warranted review by the small Steering Committee. I would think we all get the difference and wouldn’t want to put a process in place that’s so rigid we can’t help each other out as we learn how to do our service positions.

Thank you,


Results of Voting on Proposal 6

Voting: 16 participants voted: 14 in favor, and 2 against.  There were no minority opinions submitted, therefore the proposal passes with a 2/3 majority.


Group Conscience Decision:

The statement will be added as #9 to the Business Meeting Guidelines.

When a Trusted Servant (TS-A) feels that another Trusted Servant (TS-B) is not meeting the requirements of her position description, TS-A will take her issues to the small Steering Committee (made up of the Business Chair, Secretary, and Listkeepers) for consideration. She should not engage with or confront TS-B. The small Steering Committee can choose to bring the issue to the full Steering Committee.

The review of TS-B’s performance should be based only on the duties outlined in the position description. If it is found that the complaint is based on different personal working styles, preferences, or infrequent mistakes – and TS-B is otherwise meeting the requirements of her job description, the complaint will be dismissed without informing or involving TS-B. If it is established that one or more of the duties assigned to TS-B is not being met, the small Steering Committee will:

  1. Assure that TS-B is aware of and allowed to respond to the complaints and, if appropriate, to propose remedial actions to correct problems.
  2. If TS-B does not propose remedial actions, the small Steering Committee will establish appropriate remedial actions that TS-B can take to correct the problems;
  3. Establish a timeframe and deadline for remedial actions to be taken and documented;
  4. If the small Steering Committee has not already elevated the issue to the full Steering Committee, they will inform the larger Steering Committee of the findings, remedial actions, and timeframe;
  5. The full Steering Committee will decide whether TS-B can remain in the position or should be removed;
  6. If the Steering Committee decides that TS-B should be removed from the position, they will inform her in writing of their decision. The Secretary will deliver the documented decision to TS-B and call for volunteers to fill the position to the end of the current term.

0420 – Proposal 5: Eliminate “alternative”

Proposal 5: Eliminate “Alternative” from one TS position

I propose to delete the word alternate from the list keeping job description.  There are no “ alternates” in the true sense of this word or this work

The dates of term are enough.


Rationale

It simply a housekeeping thing from the secretary viewpoint.  When the terms change each 6 months the secretary won’t have to move one person into another position.


Summary of Comments on Proposal 5

Looks good to me.

********
I don’t agree with the proposal as submitted.  The Listkeeper and Alternate Listkeeper are currently in a 2-year term; one as primary (Listkeeper) and one as Alternate.  You mention a term change every 6 months, which doesn’t match the position description that is on our website.

********
Yes, you’re right. It’s 2 years.

********
Cheryl raises a good point. The duties of the two positions may be the same, but their terms of office are different. The “Alternate” becomes the Listkeeper after she serves her one-year term as alternate. I think we should make that clear by retaining the existing position title of “Listkeeper Alternate.

********
So does the proposal need to be rewritten?

********
So, looking at the responses made me re-think a bit.

If you remove the word “alternate”, how do you know who is the primary list keeper? Description states 1yr backup and 1yr primary. That would need to be changed also.

And, why would you need to move people from one position to another after 6months? Maybe that should have said 1yr?

Maybe the proposal needs to be re-written?

********
No objection to withdrawal of proposal 5.2, eliminate “alternate” from listkeeper.

(Proposal withdraw at the request of the grow member who submitted it.  There was no further discussion and there was no vote taken.)


Results of Voting on Proposal 5

Proposal withdraw at the request of the grow member who submitted it.  There was no further discussion and there was no vote taken.

0420 – Proposal 4: Listkeeper and Greeter

Proposal 4: Edit Monthly Listkeeper Message and Greeter Letter #2

Edit Monthly Listkeeper Message and Greeter Letter #2 to address the problem of shares that bounce to the listkeepers because they are addressed to more recipients than GROW.  Further edit Greeter Letter #2 for clarity and brevity.


Rationale

  1. “Too many recipients” bounces require listkeepers to take several actions
  2. Shares that bounce are delayed from reaching GROW. Some members do not resend, even after being notified by the listkeeper.

Summary of Comments on Proposal 4

Thank you for this proposal and the suggested edits.

They seem to offer clarity and hopefully could improve the problem of bounced emails as described.

Thank you for whom ever has worked on this.

*********
Changes look good. They clarify the information better.

*********
I agree with this change.

*********
Thanks to Karen for this!

Yes, it makes sense.

*********
I agree with the proposal overall, but I do have one concern. That’s the use of the word “bounce” with no explanation. Why is bouncing bad?
Many members of Grow do not have an in-depth understanding of the terms we use. Like, when an e-mail bounces, it doesn’t get posted to the list, right? That means no one would see their share. I’m assuming this. I do not know that for sure, which is why I’d like to see clarification on the consequences of an e-mail bouncing.

*********
Danna, I am attempting to answer your question as someone who has been a listkeeper for different groups for many years.
The “Too Many Recipients” bounces are very frustrating and time consuming to deal with. If members would read how to send email there would be very few such bounces.

A “Too Many Recipients” bounce happens when a member puts another address in the To or CC field instead of just the GROW address. Anonymity is the reason this restriction was setup. The message does not go to GROW but goes to whatever other address was there.

Many times members have written beautiful shares that never get read because the member does not resend. This is very upsetting
When new members do this, it is understandable but we have so many who feel they need to put their own address as well as the GROW address.

This is the email the listkeeper sends:
Your recent message was addressed to the Grow list and to at least one other person. The list is set up to only accept messages addressed to Grow, in order to help protect anonymity.

If you sent the message from a cell phone or tablet, you may not be aware that many are set up with “reply to all” as the default.

The individual or individuals you sent the message to probably received the message; it is just the Grow list that didn’t.

If you wish for GROW to receive your post please resend just to the GROW address: grow@oso-aa.org

We receive numerous “Too Many Recipients” bounces that take up time that could be used doing other duties.

Hope my explanation helps. Karen, our outgoing Listkeeper, is much more articulate than I am and she presented the proposal.

In service

*********
Clarity and brevity work for me!

*********
Thank you, Nancy. That is very helpful information. I wonder if it might make sense to include all or part of the language from the letter the listkeeper sends (when there have been multiple addressees) in the Listkeeper Letter and Greeter Letter #2. I’m thinking of women who come to Grow with little knowledge or experience with e-mail.

I’m suggesting adding the following to the Recommended Language as shown:

Send shares to the List use this address: grow@oso-aa.org

(Use this address for all your shares or posts of any sort to the regular list. Address your share to ONLY the grow@oso-aa.org address. If another address is included (even if in the ‘Cc or ‘Bcc field) the email will bounce). The list is set up to accept messages that are addressed to Grow only. The individual(s) you send messages in addition to GROW will probably receive the message; however, the Grow list will not.

Thank you,


Results of Voting on Proposal 4

Voting: 16 participants voted: 16 in favor, and 0 against.  The proposal passed unanimously.


Group Conscience Decision:

The Monthly Listkeeper Message and the Greeter Letter #2 will be modified:

Monthly Listkeeper’s Message
(this is not the entire letter, just the first paragraphs that are modified.)

Important Addresses
Listkeeper’s Address: grow-owner@oso-aa.org
(Use this address to change your subscription, or to unsubscribe, resubscribe or ask questions about GROW-related email problems).

Send shares to the List use this address: grow@oso-aa.org
(Use this address for all your shares or posts of any sort to the regular list. Address your share to ONLY the grow@oso-aa.org address. If another address is included (even if in the ‘Cc or ‘Bcc field) the email will bounce).  The list is set up to accept messages that are addressed to Grow only. The individual(s) you send messages in addition to GROW will probably receive the message; however, the Grow list will not.

NOTE: Please do not post subscription change requests to GROW because they are too easily overlooked.

Revised Greeter Letter #2
Welcome to GROW! This is one of two emails you will receive from me with the information you need to start participating in our meeting right away. You might want to save these for future reference.

Sharing with the Group
Address your email to grow@oso-aa.organd your post will be sent to all members.

  • Do not add any other addresses to the email or it will bounce. This includes addresses in the ‘Cc or ‘Bcc address fields.
    Address your share to ONLY the grow@oso-aa.org address. If another address is included (even if in the ‘Cc or ‘Bcc field) the email will bounce).  The list is set up to accept messages that are addressed to Grow only. The individual(s) you send messages in addition to GROW will probably receive the message; however, the Grow list will not.
  • Add grow@oso-aa.orgto your Address Book to ensure GROW emails don’t go to your SPAM folder.

Replying to a Post

  • Do not use the “Reply to All” option when you respond privately to another member’s post to GROW, as your personal message will also be directed to the GROW list and it will bounce to the Listkeepers.
  • For those using phones and tablets, be aware that the default reply option is often “Reply to All.” Please double-check.

Email Volume
The volume of mail through the GROW list can be overwhelming. If you experience this, you might find it very helpful to choose one or more of the following:

  • Create a separate email address to reduce the confusion of mixing GROW mail with your other email. Email the Listkeepers at grow-owner@oso-aa.orgwith your new address. As an FYI, AOL and Yahoo addresses have been problematic for some members with the GROW list.
  • If you use an existing email for GROW, you might create folders for your GROW email; filters can also be set up to direct GROW mail into the GROW folder.
  • Request the Digest Version (a file containing the day’s posts in a single email) by contacting the Listkeepers at grow-owner@oso-aa.org.
    Topics

Meeting Topic
A new meeting topic is sent to everyone on the list each Sunday and we share throughout the week. On topic and Off topic shares are welcome.

  • Off topic posts should be appropriate for an AA meeting. Please note in your subject line if your share is Off topic (Off Topic: … )
  • On topic posts are your shares on the weekly meeting topic. Please note in your subject line if your share is On topic (On Topic: … )
  • Please do not type in all CAPS; this is considered to be yelling.

Web Site and Password
Visit the GROW web site for more information. The URL for GROW is: http://www.g-r-o-w.com. For the members only section you’ll need the password: sobertodayhow2484

Other
If you have questions not answered by our website information, please write to me and I’ll be sure to answer them or send your questions to someone who can.

I hope Grateful Recovering Online Women is helpful to you in your journey and growth in sobriety.

Again, welcome
[ Greeter Name ]
Grateful Recovering Online Women

0420 – Proposal 3: Eliminate Grapevine TS

Proposal 3: Eliminate Grapevine TS Position

Grapevine Rep should also be done away with. Secretary has posted a service position now weekly for the last two months. It’s clear the meeting membership is not interested in the additional topic.


Summary of Comments on Proposal 3

In my opinion having the Grapevine as an additional monthly topic enhances GROW’s effectiveness in carrying the message.

I don’t believe eliminating this from our group just because it’s currently an empty service post is rationale for stopping having a Grapevine topic meeting.

In my few years as a member here this role has up until recently always been filled and has always generated some sharing.

The current lack of take up of the role I don’t feel is an indication that “meeting membership is not interested in the additional topic.”

At this time especially I’d like to feel we as a group are keeping sharing strong for all the new members – new to online sobriety or just new to sobriety, and a monthly Grapevine meeting gives those who are willing and have time to share another opportunity to do so.

*********
I disagree as well in eliminating this post.

With the amount of new members lately, it very possible that those new members would like the Grapevine.

So as suggestion, lets try it a bit longer and then see what happens.

*********
I think we should keep trying to fill this position as it’s a valuable asset, especially for the newcomers as Sophie mentioned.


Results of Voting on Proposal 3

Voting: 14 members voted: 13 no and 1 yes.  There were no minority opinions submitted, therefore the proposal fails and will not be discussed further.  This topic cannot be considered again until April 2021.


Group Conscience Decision:

The proposal failed, therefore the Grapevine position will not be eliminated.

0420 – Proposal 2: Eliminate OIAA TS

Proposal 2: Eliminate OIAA TS Position

OIAA rep position should be done away with…. We have discussed this at lengths for several meetings back and forth, to keep or dissolve. Since we have not had any actual representative for the last year, it should be dissolved, We can still maintain a visible presence on the internet without a Rep.


Summary of Comments on Proposal 2

I disagree with eliminating this post.

We aren’t connected up to the service structure of AA at the moment.

The last reports from OIAA were actually quite positive – reports of the OIAA functioning more manageably, and the OIAA role being shared by two GROW members.

Now more than ever surely we need to have some connection to AA as a whole, if nothing else than to share our own group’s experience.

We have a strong history in this group of following Traditions and being a safe place, these are things we could be sharing if we were connected up to the wider AA structure.

My thoughts are this could be a discussion about how to sponsor/support someone into this role, not getting rid of it.

**********
I am glad this was brought up, as this was a position I was thinking of, had gone through what duties entailed, bit tentative, spoke to my sponsor and she gave me email address of lady in NY.

I know this sounds like I am over reaching, but a position that interests me, and if God willing would like to do that after my term as Weekly Leader Listkeeper.

**********
Not sure what the improvements have been since I filled the position last year. I had taken on the position with service in mind but the infighting and lack of any type of administrator taking charge of the negative emails drove me from the group. I stepped back and reported what I needed to on both sides and stayed out of it. Someone had just made off with the money in the treasury as well. The group as it was then was not good for my serenity and service. They needed some work on the infrastructure in my opinion. Just my experience.

**********
I am not sure.  Were you the last person to hold the position?

Can someone answer that question? And if someone held the position after you can they please comment?

**********
I was one of the people that shared the position. I was on first and was followed by another member

**********
Hello all. I was the last OIAA rep and still receive OIAA posts. OIAA has quite suddenly become extremely involved in advising AA groups how to set up online meetings.

And this week, the topic has been how to protect meetings from trolls on Zoom, which is a growing problem.

I think that having this position filled would be of benefit to our new members especially as many of them are from brick and mortar meetings that have gone to Zoom.

**********
Hi all

Thank you for sharing your recent experience in role and what OIAA is currently involved in.

I realise we have to let this discussion here in GROW run and voting occur  as a Proposal has been made, but I would like to put myself forward for this role.

I have served as GSR for several of my face to face home groups over the years and have experience of serving in other roles at several face to face Intergroups & Area Service Commitees in the U.K. and NZ.

I’d also like to thank our member for her interest in serving as future OIAA when her current Trusted Servant role comes to an end.


Results of Voting on Proposal 2

Voting: 16 members voted: 15 no and 1 yes.  There were no minority opinions submitted, therefore the proposal fails and will not be discussed further.  This topic cannot be considered again until April 2021.


Group Conscience Decision:

The proposal failed, therefore the OIAA position will not be eliminated.

0420 – Proposal 1: “Backup” Leader List

Proposal 1: Maintenance of “Backup” Leaders

Do away with the weekly leader list keeper having to call for and maintain a list of “backup” leaders in case of the weekly leader scheduled has not posting a meeting.

In the event the meeting isn’t posted AND members start asking if the topic has been posted. The weekly leader listkeeper has the authority to go to grows website and post a meeting from the list of past topics.


Rationale

This simplifies the process eliminating any lag time or stress resulting from waiting for one of the backups to respond.


Summary of Comments on Proposal 1

I disagree as when the list was handed over to me, their were only 3 ladies on the list as back up leaders.

When I sent out the call for back up leaders middle March, another 5 ladies responded, plus 2 ladies from previous list, that not to say the lady from previous list not willing to be back up leader.

That 8 ladies in total.

My thinking is the person you ask to be back up must respond to the email, and failing that their few other ladies willing to do it.

As long as this sorted out by Saturday latest Sunday morning so the list still goes out to the group on Sunday.

In the event of the scheduled lady to chair,  has responded her willingness to chair but does not for whatever reason, then I would say yes the weekly leader can pick a topic of previous topics in GROW website.

I may be wrong but it very seldom that this situation occurs.

********
If our weekly Listkeeper is happy with the way this currently works, ie having a back up list available for the very rare occurrence that someone misses their scheduled slot, my thoughts are we keep it as is and avoid having a big debate over a minor point.

********
I agree, simplify by leaving it up to the weekly listkeeper to act quickly to just pull another topic if needed.


Results of Voting on Proposal 1

Voting: Sixteen (16) participants voted: one (1) in favor, and fifteen (15) against Proposal 1.  There were no minority opinions submitted, therefore the proposal fails and will not be discussed further.  This topic cannot be considered again until April 2021.


Group Conscience Decision:

The proposal failed, therefore there will be no change to the current process followed by the weekly leader listkeeper.

0420 – OIAA Report

Apr 2020 OIAA Report

Dear GROW

As your Online Intergroup of AA Rep (OIAA) I’m updating you with some pending changes to the OIAA website.

Some of you may be aware of AA’s Online Intergroup and may have come through there in your search for an online AA group. Indeed you may have found us, GROW listed there!

A working party at OIAA have been creating a new improved OIAA website. Included below are their rationale and links to the original website and the new “beta” site.

If it interests you to take a look please do. The “beta” new site is live but still in the improvement stage so the committee are welcoming any feedback or suggestions.

There will in time be a Member’s Area as there is on the original site but this will be done later.

The OIAA Assembly will be voting in the next few days whether to make the beta site the live one and run with it, and whether to cover the costs which they are financially able to do whilst leaving their usual Prudent Reserve.

If you have any comments or questions please let me know.

Thank you for having me be of service.
Sophie F
OIAA Rep for GROW

Rationale from OIAA Web Committee
We had a plan to move forward at a ‘prudent’ pace. Due to the increase traffic during this COVID outbreak, we are working in an accelerated manner and learning through the process.

We created this new beta site out of the necessity to:

1) Be Mobile (Smartphone) Friendly
2) Increase usability/search ability and
3) Make it run fast and efficiently.

Original website
https://www.aa-intergroup.org/downloads/index.php

Improved Beta Website

History of OIAA