AA Renewal

I'm reluctant to post this here but it seems like I need to at least mention this on this blog for, well, I don't know - integrity?

There is a minority of folks in Alcoholics Anonymous who feel that AA may be sick as an organization and, perhaps, as a fellowship.  We are not sure what, if anything, could or should be done about it but we see symptoms of this illness in our meetings and our AA business endeavors (e.g. our service commitments).

We are not among those who feel the need to bash AA or that AA as an institution is actually harming people.  To the contrary, all of us involved in this thus far feel we owe our sobriety, our very lives to AA as it existed when we found it in that it led us to accept the grace of God and become spiritually awakened as a consequence of AA's program of recovery.

We are convinced that, if AA is to change (a big if), it will change as a consequence of people talking about what changes might be made at coffee around our meetings, at our groups' business meetings, at our assemblies and our General Service Conference.  What a few of us realized this past fall is that we wanted to have an area where we would be able to brainstorm and collaborate about what AA could do to fix what we feel are fundamental problems in our organization.

Or, perhaps what we know as "AA" today should just be allowed to disappear and that the next organization (if any) to come up will be born anew from the ashes of that old organization?

I don't know the answer.  I don't think anyone who's participated in this effort so far feels that we know all the answers.

What I do know is that, for me as a member of AA today, if AA were to pass into obscurity by, in part, my lack of action, I would wonder if "I should have done something..."  So, I am participating in this new site where we hope to be sorting out some of these thoughts.  Again, this is not a new "movement" or a set of folks who want to do anything other than seek some clarity about the hard issues we need to face and deal with as a fellowship.

Or deliberately decide not to.

So, if you care, check out aarenewal.org.  Participate and/or register if you want to.  Mention it to others if it seems useful.  Ignore it completely if it seems irrelevant or against your principles of participation in AA.

All that said, I think what I've generally been doing on this blog is completely separate from my participation on the aarenewal.org site.  While I might share my experiences as a sober member in both places, what I see is that this blog is only a reflection of my personal experience trying to apply the AA principles in an imperfect life.  That other space is a place we're trying to improve an organization we think is imperfect by applying these principles.  Related but not the same.

But, I thought some readers here might want to know something about where my head has been at when I'm not writing here...

Internet and AA - finishing thoughts

(Context: for a few days I'm thinking through some perspectives on AA and the internet in preparation for a workshop)

The internet has fundamentally changed "how I do" AA.  This is hard to over-state:

1. Almost all of my AA service is coordinated and scheduled via email and common calendars.
2. Most of what I write, report or, collaborate on is done online.
3. When I need to look up a particular phrase or passage from our Big Book, I'll often start online even if the book is sitting right next to me.
4. When I travel, I usually start looking for meetings that I might attend via internet searches (e.g. Google: AA Boulder CO, online Intergroup, etc.).
   
5. When we do night-watch for our local central office (phones from AA central office are transferred to my home or cell phone overnight so that it appears I'm answering the call at the local AA office), we try to be close to a computer so that we can look up meeting times and addresses online if necessary.
6. My home group keeps our speaker calendar online (privacy protected) so that more than one person can schedule speakers for the meeting.
7. When I research a topic, idea or some part of AA history, I usually start online.
8. When I refer a speaker tape to someone, I usually look for the speaker online before flipping through our badly maintained library.
9. When I have a question about an event, I usually look for the flier online before sorting through my mountains of paper.
10. I write blog articles frequently (almost daily). 
11. I read 6-7 members' blog entries almost daily.
12. I participate in (primarily watch) online social networks.
    
13. I collaborate with other people about AA issues and concerns online.
14. AA meets the rest of my life (travel, schedule, etc.) where the rest of my life happens online (e.g. web maps, travel sites, calendars, banking, etc.).

I suppose that's not unique to AA.  If I'd given my life to  a church 25 years ago, it would have probably evolved similarly.  We have a good friend in the fellowship who was recently ordained as a monk.  It's amusing to think how he's integrated that ancient calling and path to the world of Google and Twitter.

But, if AA is to remain relevant and available to the drunk of today and tomorrow, I think we must pay attention to and care about how and where AA, as an entity, is online.

In all of my reflections this week, I've found myself often thinking "how is this new?"  Quite often, my answer is "Not at all!!!".  The same traditions and principles that have caused us to recover and have protected our fellowship for 75 years need simply to be adapted and applied to the world and the AA work that includes the internet.

I've thought often about how Bill "sold" the idea of writing a book to the approximately 25-35 people that comprised our fellowship in 1937.  Many (some argue the majority) felt that the AA message of recovery could not be carried by a book.  That, writing a book would be a distraction to the fellowship and would dilute the AA message and limit it's effectiveness.  Bill persevered, our Big Book was published and AA was born anew.

Today, I think we need to look for the dozens of good AA members who will engender AA's presence online much as Bill's vision brought us a book.  The challenges will involve applying principles of anonymity, self-support, honesty, self-sacrifice - all of them will be discussed endlessly until the truth, for us, emerges.

With an appreciation of, perhaps even a reverence for, AA's guiding principles and traditions, we will make new mistakes, learn our lessons and carry our message as best we can wherever the hand reaches out for hope.

That can be our responsibility...

Internet and AA - social networking sites

(Context: for a few days I'm thinking through some perspectives on AA and the internet in preparation for a workshop)

I hope to split this part of the discussion between 2 articles.  Today, I'd like to express some observations about the "public" forums like Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, etc.  Tomorrow, I hope to share my observations about recovery-focused sites where the situation(s) may or may not be different.

I don't remember when I had a whole week go by that I didn't receive at least one "invitation" to join some networking site or another.  The overture is always the same: "so-and-so is inviting you to join them at..." and then (generally) there's a chance to view some portion of that person's postings along with the postings of that person's "friends" or "followers" or whatever jargon they use for connections.

In the interest of full disclosure of my direct experience, I am a member of only a few of these networks (I find it easier and easier to decline or not respond to requests to join - regardless my relationship to those who invite me) and I generally only lurk on a few friends' efforts - I seldom post "what I'm doing" updates.  For me, blogging is my current preferred mechanism of and focus for sharing my AA experience online.

However, my wife and several other AA members I'm close to have tight circles of "friends" who share many poignant moments of their lives through "writing on their walls", "tweeting" or, whatever it is they choose to do in those circles.

Before I launch into some serious opinion sharing here, please, please, please understand that some of these folks are AA members who I believe have been real drunks and have had the spiritual experience directed by and proscribed by our AA program.  Most I would be happy to share an AA meeting or coffee with any time.  They are delightful members who may be more right than I am about what is right or wrong in AA and the internet.

That said, I truly believe that many are misguided in their reckless abandon of anonymity and other principles in the use of these media for sharing their AA experience.

The strongest argument in defense of some of what is shared on these sites (full names, pictures, pictures and names of other friends, etc.) is that you have to have been invited and responded to form a "closed group" of people.  Some of the points they argue include:

1. Since it's a closed group, it is no longer in the public and issues of anonymity (in terms of identity) can easily be set aside.  After all, you don't wear a bag over your head when you attend an AA meeting (although it may have been suggested to a few of us ;-) ).
2. The efficiency of sharing intimate details of their life's experience ("OK - I'm heading into the doctor's office now and am really afraid!", "My girlfriend isn't answering the phone - I'm shook up!", "I just got a promotion and I just love my new office!", "Here's a picture of my cat's new play-toy!", ...) with many friends at once actually improves their effectiveness at life and working of their program.
3. This type of sharing can lead to a transparency (honesty?) in their lives that is useful to them.  I no longer just "check in" with a sponsor - I have a broad range of folks who know all about me and what I'm up to.
4. Similarly, you can watch people you really care about and suggest, for example, that they might choose to go to an AA meeting rather than rent another movie.
   
5. They can more efficiently and effectively keep up with a wider circle of people in AA than they could only using personal contact or the phone.
6. Part of that more effective sharing includes pictures.  Who hasn't gotten a wonderful message from someone with a picture attached that says so much and is really meaningful?
   
7. It helps eliminate some of the problems with the classic AA rumor chain - everyone can know the same information from the same source rather than getting someone's spin on "news".   Most of us have been victimized by the AA fellowship's version of the game "telephone" at some time in our lives.

I'm sure they see many other benefits as well in that some of them spend hours out of nearly every day engaged in activities around these networks (posting messages, checking up, expanding networks, etc.). Again, it's really not my deal right now so I may not even be hitting really important benefits of this type of sharing.  If you know of some, please educate me.

On the other hand, I think there are some down sides to this as well:

1. Anonymity (privacy, identity) is not assured.  While I may not be friends with John, even before I become John's friend (say, he invites me to friend or follow him), I can generally see who John's friends are before I enter this relationship.  Indeed, often I get friend/follow requests and don't recognize who the invitation is from.  I've browsed around for hours in this potential friend's  friends' spaces:
1. Looking for clues as to who the request might be from (who John is)
   
2. Being greatly entertained with some of the stupid (and vulgar and obscene and ...) stuff that some folks I may or may not know publish on these networks
2. While an individual's information is generally protected (and I think the networks are getting better at this as time goes on), as recently as last week I stumbled across a link that plopped me in the middle of an individual's Facebook photos that I know he would not want as publicly available as it was.  At the very least, I think one should be very careful.
3. I think the fact that thinking one may have their identity protected, they might miss several additional points related to the spiritual principle of anonymity.  Not the least of which this (your life, my life) might be much less about who I am and who you are and more what we can offer to be useful.  I am concerned that who I become when I think my identity is protected is not my best.  At least for the pages and sites I've seen, we become focused on the mundane and the sickness more than becoming the best we can be under spiritual guidance.  It seems these networks support me to lower my standards rather than seek progress.
   
4. Quite often, connection requests devolve rapidly into other agendas.  Of the ~20-30 people I've "connected" with on one service, nearly all of them eventually came around to wanting to convert me to their religion, sell me a book, somehow get me to click through their marketing portal, whatever.  I've learned that, when someone has more than 5,000 "connections" (maybe even over more than 20 connections), there is generally some other factor at play.  Someone is selling something or has an program (other than AA) to push.
   
5. While I may or may not be interested in some facets of your life, quite often as families/friends/AA friends/business associates all get involved in the same connection pool, someone is probably going to learn something they really didn't want to know.  I doubt seriously that any woman I know would march into an AA meeting and share her menstrual cycle but some in these forums seem to include that as important information to share.
   Maybe this could be dealt with by "grouping" friends into different sets of folks, and some of the networks allow for this now, but general sharing with all seems to be the norm.  It's easier and simpler and, frankly, I think people just forget who all might see what particular information.  And, again, friends who invite other friends into the network will probably also get to see that information.
6. While I work pretty hard to keep my sharing on this blog and the blogs I follow and comment on to be primarily aligned with the program and principles of AA, in social network sites this becomes unwieldy and probably almost cross-purposes of what a social network is about.  Social networks seem to be first and foremost about encouraging individuals to share as individuals with great diversity.
   Not every conversation held at coffee or even with a sponsor is going to be aligned with an AA "party line".  It shouldn't be.  However, the sharing that happens in these social networks has a persistence and reach that spans well beyond our experience in the past.
   As I contemplate including my sponsor, people I sponsor, and other friends in the program into one of these networks, I'm concerned about what might be shared and how it could be received - especially once it's removed from the context in which it's shared (as often happens in these networks).
7. While these networks are currently "free" to subscribers, all in the industry agree that, eventually, some financial model based on subscription fees, advertising, or some other financial component will be required to support the service.  One could easily foresee that "Joe's Treatment Center" would be happy to attach it's click-through logo to all my messages about recovery from boozing or communities where that is often discussed.  If one reads the fine print on these services, what you publish does belong to you but they have the rights to do anything with that data they chose to - including, in some cases, leaving your writings up after you close out your account.
   

All this said, I feel AA members need to have a presence in these networks.  I was discouraged at the recent SW Regional AA Forum when I learned that AA World Services intervened and had an account with the name of "alcoholicsanonymous" removed from Twitter.  I would have much rather that AAWS would have taken over that account and supported a message service that provided something that injected a conversation about recovery in AA into that network.

Finally, I don't think anyone really believes this generation is the final destination of this technology.  I would hazard a guess that the memory of MySpace, Twitter and, Facebook will in the future be much the same as the memory of CompuServe or AOL is to the internet of today - important milestones in history but the future social happenings on these networks will be much more natural and elegant - integrated into one's online experiences.  For that reason, I think we, as a fellowship and individuals (and maybe even groups) in AA, should experiment with what works and doesn't work in supporting our AA principles and program of recovery in this venue.

God willing, we will learn the lessons we need to be useful into the future.

Politics...

I met with a sponsee this morning. He prepared me Monday by saying he had a major "political" question that we'd need to deal with this morning. While they're not necessarily my favorite conversations to have, I have been in service for most of my 25 years so it does come up and we get through it...

It turns out that our Intergroup has published a set of night watch procedures which he took great exception to some of what was stated and directions that were given. Night watch is when our central office closes at night and the phones are turned over to a member of the program's phone and they can then answer calls to our Central Office (like, instead of the answering service). I agreed with him. I think we could be killing people by following those directions exactly.

So, braced by the context his first question was "Is Intergroup part of AA?". At this point I felt like I could have been channeling Mr. SponsorPants - but it was just my experience.

In my opinion, any effort of one alcoholic helping another alcoholic with experience, strength and hope in the AA program of recovery is AA. So, yes, unreservedly, Intergroup is of and part of AA. What is also true is that Intergroup is not part of AA's General Service Structure. As a result, it has it's own processes whereby it works in accordance with AA's traditions to be an extension of the groups it serves. These processes vary across different Intergroups, but our Intergroup does have a process for accountability.

The next question was "Does Intergroup abide by AA's traditions and principles?" My answer was that I expected my Intergroup would and, if it didn't, I bore some personal responsibility in seeing that it does.

So, we agreed on a 3-fold plan of dealing directly with the problem we identified.

1. As of now, we would not follow the specific advice offered in the night watch process and would recommend others taking night watch similarly ignore these parts of the process.
2. We would each talk to our Intergroup representatives and other members of Intergroup to see if we could open a discussion at Intergroup to improve the documented process - keeping much that is good in the guidelines and modifying those things that don't work in our opinion. Given that my sponsee didn't know for sure if his group even had an Intergroup representative, I thought that might be a great piece of the conversation for him and his group as well.
   
3. Intergroup, as a whole, could then either take some suggestions and make changes or not.

We agreed that, in the unlikely event Intergroup elected to not take input into these guidelines, we would elect to not do night watch shifts - given that we could not accept the processes that the group conscience supported went against what we thought appropriate for a 12 step call. Also, at that time, we would need to evaluate our participation (time and financial) with Intergroup.

Seemed simple enough after all...

Seventh tradition...

Probably the best "pitch man" I've ever heard around AA's Seventh Tradition was our area Treasurer a number of years ago. While, on balance, I think he was probably not our best treasurer (he had a hard time understanding the differences between the "books" of AA and other businesses or enterprises), when he talked about the nature and principles of our Seventh tradition, he seldom talked about money.

To him, this tradition was all about the privilege and opportunity of sacrifice, about truly "belonging" to something and, about choosing to participate.

When I first sobered up, I was counseled in the first few days that I was attending meetings that most people put a dollar in the basket but, if I didn't have a dollar, I could put in 50 cents. If I didn't have 50 cents, I could put in a quarter, a dime, a nickel - but, whatever I felt I could spare, that it would be appreciated and included to help "keep our doors open". They taught me that part of my "right" to be here was that I could participate at whatever level I felt I could afford.

Further, whether I would or chose to contribute financially or not, I could always clean, help with dishes, make coffee or otherwise make myself generally useful at our meeting place.

I look with sadness at my home group's largest meeting with over a 100 people in attendance and the basket often is passed 2 full rows without someone feeling enough ownership to contribute anything. I'm not sad for our meeting, we have a great deal on rent and we always seem to have plenty of money - at least for now. I'm sad for what seems to be a whole lot of our fellowship who don't choose to participate.

I try to think of this in all of my life. For much of my life, I was blessed with a good income where I could always "throw money" rather than show up and participate. Don't get me wrong, my whole family enjoyed the vacations, gifts (sometimes extravagant) and my slight-of-hand where I would always pick up the check for our outings. But, for now, that time is gone.

I've had to learn the same thing those deadbeats (I'm joking...) at my meeting need to learn. That, to participate and belong to something is one of the richest gifts life offers. The greatest joy of my life over the weekend was throwing nickles and dimes into the pool for my grandson to dive and get. No one seems to notice that it's not silver dollars or even quarters any more.

I think "self support" has everything to do with choosing to fully participate and the greater the sacrifice, the greater the blessings. Sometimes not blessings I would have sought out but always way bigger and grander than my little plans and designs.

That's been my experience...

Punitive...

I spent a good part of the day doing research into AA's Warranty 5:

"that its actions never be personally punitive nor an incitement to public controversy"

Of course, the only way I could figure out how to do that was to look at all that I could find on the web about where AA had been personally punitive or in the throws of public controversy.

...there is a lot...

One of the things I love most about AA history (distant past and recent) is that, at our core, from the very beginning, we have been and probably always will be a bunch of drunks. We don't deserve this recovery program. From the get-go, we have been eager to either sell it, hide it, or burn it down. From Bill and Bob on (but especially Bill), we have been first, last and always - drunks.

Please don't get me wrong.

I really love this thing (AA) and I an grateful for and honor the suffering and hard work that has gone on through our AA history to preserve our message and our fellowship.

But the only explanation that I can come up with as to why we've survived 74+ years is God's grace.

And, I think based on that we might survive into the future as well - that's my hope...

Follow protocol ... ?

I've noodled about this for about a week and it finally occurred to me that I might put it out there on the blogosphere as a question.

Earlier in the week, I was reflecting some on our principle of anonymity, how we do that, why we do that, endorsements (explicit or implied), affiliation - all that junk around principles in AA that I seem to be so inclined to reflect on at this point in my life.

It occurred to me that maybe the whole "follow" thing that we do in online AA where we publicly state who we follow and (perhaps) publicly follow or note (perhaps) others who follow us deserves some reflection. This is the normal way to build traffic in the web world and has become the really big thing on all forms of social networking on the web (e.g., myspace, facebook, twitter, various blogspaces, etc.).

For a week, I took down the gadget that states who I follow. I noticed that, when I did that, some of the folks who follow my posts stopped showing up and my traffic dropped slightly. While interesting, it's probably not really significant in that the traffic to my blog is still pretty small (my blog is pretty new and I don't get that the world will ever beat a path to my door to hear my utterances - online or any other place ;-) ).

I put that gadget back up today. At face value, my thinking is that I provide these references as a way for folks to see who else I follow much the same way as I discuss with folks at a meeting what other meetings I attend. Clearly, my intention is not really to endorse all that is said at that meeting but to point to some other place I go to support my program. Sometimes I will even say something to the effect: "...that meeting has been running off track and could really use some support to get back to a basic AA message...". Truth is, the community of folks I currently read blogs from every day was found looking through others' follow lists so these lists have been useful .

Lots of folks in the blogosphere have had a lot more time to think about all this than I have and I was just wondering if anyone else has asked these sorts of questions of themselves before they start following another blog (and provide a link from their blog area to others):

1. Do you think about whether a particular blogger is consistent with their AA message when you decide to add them to your follow list?
2. Do you intend your list of folks who follow to "support a message" or provide entertainment? Both? Neither?
3. It seems most of us share "in a general way" on our blogs - do you also keep a private, personal journal? If you do, do you do that online?

As a student of AA's steps, tradition, concepts, and warranties, I think I know how all this stuff should work - what's right for me. Then, a simple little thing like this idea of "following" and the question of how can this best serve the purposes of the higher power I'm in service to and everything becomes a question again...

...and isn't that wonderful...?

Am I different...?

At an AA workshop/gathering recently, someone threw out the topic "...are alcoholics different than other people?"

As with most topics of this sort, the authoritative answer at the end of a lengthy discussion was all of:

1. Yes, definitely
   
2. No, definitely
3. Of course, obviously
4. Not at all
5. Only as pertains to drinking alcohol
   
6. We shouldn't care

I found that 20 minutes into this discussion, I was pretty much neutral on the topic. On the one hand, I find it irresponsible and irrational when folks in a meeting excuse all sorts of behavior and thoughts on their alcoholism or "alcoholic thinking". On the other hand, when I hang out with family or non-alcoholics, I find that I do see the world differently. On the other other hand, when I'm working with new drunks I find all sorts of identification with their strange ideas and thinking (at least what it used to be like for me). On the other other other hand (OK - I'm done with that now), I hardly recognize how I used to think - what my priorities used to be - the way I used to make decisions.

So, I don't know that we alcoholics, as a class, are different or not. What I do know is that I'm different than I used to be and, based on a "...daily reprieve contingent on the maintenance of my spiritual condition...", I will continue to be different and grow.

Thank God...

Ed

A new...

I started to title this a new day and then realized that it's a new night and then I thought it might not be morning until I finish writing and post and then I realized that it didn't make any difference...

Each moment is a new moment...

So, I had the tough conversation today (see earlier post) and he said he was very careful - that he chose his words so that he wasn't accusing me of being dishonest. I still think I might have heard it the way he said it and was going to find out (from the tapes) exactly what he said and then, I realized, it just doesn't make any difference.

In fact he was very complimentary of me and my contributions...

...which, should have been "enough" but I realized that, in the spirit of unity, I'm part of a committee where he expressed considerable vitriol toward several members personally. He also expressed complete disagreement with some over-all decisions and direction. He was, I think, attempting to be gracious and support me (while placing the attack where he felt it was deserved) but I realized, in the spirit of unity, I have to stand with my committee (I'm a member, not the chair). My parting words with him were that, while I appreciated his kind words, if we as a committee did something offensive or wrong, I was at least partly responsible.

So, though my ego may be repaired some, I remain sad.

I think the whole unity thing might be misunderstated and under-appreciated. In my local AA community, you'd think AA's 1st tradition was either optional or irrelevant. It's all about me getting my recovery and you've got to be responsible for getting yours. People sound like they really are all about just recovering and that they should be able to do any old thing they want to in support of that and bring all of that to AA - consequences be damned.

On my other blog, 36princpiles.org/blog, I've written several articles where, the best of my research reveals through our history and collective experience, that we either hang together or not. For example, we as AA groups either own our service structure (through our delegates and our Conference) or we're in some peril.

I think we feel we can indulge these personal dislikes and, in this case, outright hatred and still work as a collective unit. I don't think there's any requirement that we agree on everything - or anything. Certainly there's no requirement toward conformity. I don't have to go out of my way to invite people I'm not comfortable with into my social circles.

But, at the end of the day, I think I get it that my life depends on AA unity. That, sometimes, I have to take the argument that I disagreed with (to the very ends of the earth - because I AM right!!!), set aside my opinion, and accept the group conscience - as my own...

I'm no saint on this. But I am sad...

Peace.

Ed