Dear Barbara, dear all,
I'm very happy about your contribution and the clarity you express the
things I perceive similar to you. Though I'm very happy about the
existence of CT (which I attend in the last month more frequently) I
share with you the skepticism about the possibility to create "real"
community by (only) participation on CT. Yes, this is an information
place, the ideas place, maybe the place, where provocations may (and
should also) take place. The place for provoking question which
normally are suppressed by "etiquette" or policy. But by my personal
standards, CT is not a community, not yet and maybe it will never be.
In my country (Czech Rep.) we have in moment a similar problem with
our national organization (CISK = Czech Institute of Systemic
Constellation). The main questions of creating every community are: 1.
what is the profit each member have from the "becoming a member" and
2. what is it, that each member is willing to do (to contribute) for
this community. Thus there are usually many participants in
communities which are free of charges and duties (CT) and not so many
in such, which are not for free (ISCA).
But this is not only the question of money, of course. The profit
could be various: feeling to be the "part" of something, being
informed, sharing ideas, having an opportunity for self promotion,
having a platform "against the enemies" and so on. For now, the CT
seems to work very well as a free internet discussion and meeting
forum, nothing more. The question which has occurred here in the past
and which we should perhaps discuss in Innsbruck is the ISCA community
issue what exactly offers ISCA to the individual members and if this
is what they (i.e. we) want to be offered. We shouldn't forget that
ISCA is not for free...
I thing the interesting question will be, how to put together (in very
free and appropriate form) the CT (or maybe only the "CT-ghost") and
ISCA. I honor fully CT is a "child" of Chris and he only could direct
the way CT will go on. So the question is not on the side of Chris,
the question is on the side of ISCA CT is a information and
discussion platform and exactly this is ISCA not (yet). In this
context I don't understand the "strongly disagreement" Hunter
expressed for the proposal of Max, though this was by Max maybe
provocatively expressed. I'm very curious for the Innsbruck meeting
and I hope many of us will gather there to discuss the question, what
for the members is the real benefit of ISCA and what we want to do to
support it.
Jan Bily, Prague
